Re: why creating "teams", "cores" and "groups" won't work this time, either

Alexey Borzov wrote:

Hi, Ian Warner wrote:

Doesnt this duel confound the point Scott was making initially. Who actually says YES - Scott that is a great idea run with it, or NO stop wasting yours and everybodies elses time ??

The community says yes, but it doesn't mean the community cannot be mistaken. I repeat: there was already a QA group in PEAR, installed by community vote. It didn't work out. See this: http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=60 I gave precisely the same reasons against this idea back then. No harm in trying again thats all Scott was indicating, I still think the category level leaders which i suggested is the way forward.

I havent got PEPr permissions and will not get them for just wanting to start ideas, I.e. I really liked the competition idea to get the site and concepts looked at by NON-PEAR people, I thought this was a no-brainer

You see, the main problem with community is that you are *not* the only one who should like your ideas. If you have an attitude "they don't like my ideas from the start, so I'll take my ball and go home", then by all means, take your ball and go home. This way you'll waste less of everyone's time. Should all like yours instead I get it :) You have totally dismissed everything Scott said, this was my point about the competition, that all I got back was dismissive emails, nothing possitive, maybe it was a crap idea, but a little more TLC should be given to people trying to brainstorm.

My company has currently hacked nearly every Package we use, we have multiple extensions for quickforms, templates, paging DO etc. I would submit more patches but they just dont seem to get a response, so why waste my time really.

Judging by the n00b questions you asked recently in pear-general, you don't really have any extensions and so are just trolling here. What noob question - you mean the one regarding your Sigma (which i like very much thanks) this was mostly due to poor documentation, I explained this to you in my reply. No need to insult me here Alexey that was a cheap shot. and probably one of the main reasons I am losing faith in PEAR.

Even if you do have them, such attitude will not help gaining respect from *any* package developers. If you already believe that I don't care about your input, why should I really care about it?

You know what would be cool is if I could just branch the package and then implement in PEAR also, the owner of the package could then see the this and no work is done except following a set branch if they choose.

There are very few OS projects that'll give you CVS / SVN access from the very start. Begin submitting *quality* patches, ideas, improvements and eventually you'll get your additional rights. Not vice versa.

I reckon OPEN PEAR up to allow people to do this. I see so many packages where Coding Standards are not even applied - how they ever got past this is a wonder, I thought this was one of the main issues PEAR stood for.

I do agree that PEAR should be more open with regards to accepting similar packages. If the developer feels heavy breath of his colleagues on the back of his neck, he'll be more inclined to keep his package in top shape.

Is PEAR elitist seems to be a common question, but only a few know the answer :)