Re: Ethics of competing proposals

Clay Loveless wrote:

I'm not trying to pick a fight with anyone here -- I'm just curious if I'm the only one who feels like the democratic process isn't getting its due here.

I think we are on a good path still.

After all, any one of us could have proposed an HTML_AJAX package at any time ... Only Luca actually took the initiative to DO ONE. Shouldn't he get his day for an unchallenged PEPr vote? Should Luca's package be accepted, Joshua could contribute his enhancements and get added as a maintainer to the package ... Just like anyone else would on any other package proposal.

Just to make it clear. PEAR is a technical group. As such we are interested in the best code. While ego are involved its irrelevant to PEAR who maintains what as long as the code is good and well maintained. So if Luca gets the ball rolling, yet someone else provides the better code, then there is no reason to accept Luca's code. What you are suggesting sounds like a land grant due to creating inertia in a new direction. However I think we are still well on our way to a collaborative effort. Josh is of course well known in the PEAR community for his other packages and his efforts on AJAX in the PHP world. However this does not define his ideas to be better by definition. Also like I stated before his ideas may just be different and in the end we may want both in PEAR. So again I hope that Luca doesnt feel too intimated by this time and Josh will use his experience in the PEAR world to soften this seemingly harsh entry into the PEAR world. I am quite confident this will work out and its obvious from the feedback that the PEAR world is sensitive enough to the problem that support is there when needed. regards, Lukas