Re: failure to act on PEAR_Frontend_Web by Pierre Alain Joye

Justin Patrin wrote: >Forget for a minute that you're a long-stanging PEAR developer. If >random people name their packages thus it dilutes our "brand" so to >speak. It makes an implicit assertion that such a package is *part* of >PEAR when it actually is not. It has not passed any review and is not >an official PEAR package and yet it bear's the name PEAR::Net_Growl. That's the way I used to name my packages when they extend other packages, it has nothing to do with PEAR brand (?) but rather with PEAR class. But I get your point. >This is all aside from the code (which I have not looked at) and what >else it uses or extends. This package may very well be well done and >you may be preparing to propose it to PEAR as I type this. That still >doesn't change the fact that the package *is not a PEAR package*. > >(Of course this package is *not* on the PEAR pages and is *not* >installable by the pear.php.net channel, but these are only ways to >find out that what seems to be true is not.) > >This looks like a useful package for OS X developers. Are you planning >on proposing it to PEAR? Yes, I just made it :) But I would welcome anyone to become lead on the package along with me. The package will live in Growl SVN repository, a warm place. I don't expect lots of changes, it just works, but some help is always welcomed. Greets. -- Bertrand Mansion http://www.mamasam.com - creative internet solutions http://golgote.freeflux.net - blog