Re: Re: Final RFC for Net_SMPP/Net_SMPP_Client

I, for one, do not thing CS is a rigid end-all solution. This may be a holy war for some, but I live in a little place I like to call "reality" and sometimes in this bizarre and strange place it makes sense to break CS from time to time in order to better conform with some outside spec (or a slew of other reasons). I also think if we're going to be nazi's about CS then all packages that do not conform to CS right now must be declared unstable until they do. I mean, if we're going to be super crazy ultra CS enforcers we MUST stamp out all instances where CS does not conform in order to save the greater good of PEAR!!!111!``` Praise be to Allah, --Joe On Jul 20, 2005, at 2:18 AM, Pierre-Alain Joye wrote:

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 13:12:30 +0400 borz_off@cs.msu.su (Alexey Borzov) wrote:

In fact, when it was in this package collection, the class was named IntegratedTemplate, not HTML_Template_IT. Seems like it was OK back then to actually rename the class to conform to coding standards...

You were not even in pear when we talked about that. The changes have been done after discussions. So now, stop whinning and move on. The discussions is about respecting CS _NOW_ and not about why some did not respect them years ago. --Pierre --PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php