Re: Re: Ajax PEAR package

Matthew Fonda wrote:

Pierre-Alain Joye wrote:

On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 10:11:32 -0700 josh@bluga.net (Joshua Eichorn) wrote:

AJAX is a pretty wide open field in the php world right now, we don't need a half baked implementation in pear. Once your class has been used for awhile and get the kinks worked out we can think about adding it to PEAR.

I have no oppinion about having an Ajax implementation or not in PEAR. However, since when do we allow only fully stable packages in PEAR? An idea can be proposed and then being developed in PEAR (thing that pepr makes hard to do though). Regards, --Pierre

Nothing wrong with packages that are not stable in PEAR, and being developed in PEAR, but we should only have the *best* implementations of a package in PEAR, i.e. we do not want to allow any bad code (I have not looked at this AJAX code, so I am not saying it is bad). I agree with Joshua here, I can see that it would be good to have an AJAX package in PEAR, but we only want the best implementation. As AJAX is rapidly growing popular trend, it is important that PEAR has the very best implementation. We do not want any half-ass implementation in PEAR. (Again, I have not looked at the proposed package, just saying in general...) I think you should propose your idea in PEPr, but to not rush to call for votes, allow to be very tested, and agreed upon by everyone. Also, personally, I do not like the name AJAX (ajax is for cleaning bathroom, not web), I think a name for this package such as XML_HttpRequest might be better, or HTML_XMLHttpRequest (as we are js/html here). Some may disagree on name here though, to some AJAX is fine. Regards, --Matthew We can start with the PEPr process, but i due think this is a case where we don't want to rush things. I'm willing to spend a lot of time reviewing the design, but its going to take me awhile since im currently writing a book and that has to be the first priority. As far as the name goes, it pretty much should be AJAX, like the name or not, thats what the tech is known as, there is no point hiding the class under another name.

-josh