Re: [PEPr] Call for votes on XML::XML_RPC2 (reproposal)

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 14:11:12 +0100 sergio.carvalho@portugalmail.com (Sergio Carvalho) wrote: > You'll understand if I feel differently. From my POV, I did > everything by the book: > - Contacted one of the leads to get an OK. Contact the active lead, which is Daniel. Daniel asked to wait his feedback. > - Launched the idea on the list (waaay back in November) fine. > - Issued the new package for approval after it completion. Wrong, a major is _not_ a new package. Nothing to do with a proposal. > The only point where there could be some argument was on the > proposal/voting cycle for the new package. I think it is > necessary, as: 1) This is in fact brand-new code; a > reimplementation for a slightly different language. > 2) Even if I did get the ok from the lead developer, this is a > core PEAR package, and more eyes looking at it won't do no harm. > > The conclusions drawn from the May discussion and the ensuing > corrections to XML_RPC2 have proven me right. Getting XML_RPC2 in > front of everyone for analysis proved fruitful and an important > quality factor. I will be undiplomatic, I do not care what people said or not. The fact is that Daniel maintains this package. Or are you saying that I can come with a major version of any package in pear, write a proposal, find 5 people to vote unconditionnal +1 and I'm done with my world domination step #1? So either you step back and wait Daniel's feedback, or I act as I should have did in may, remove this proposal. I hope you will choose the soft way. --Pierre