Re: Re: [DRAFT PROPOSAL] PEAR constitution

Greg Beaver wrote:

The previous PEAR Group made decisions, and it took almost a year before Martin managed to commit them to the documentation (thank you Martin - this is no indictment of you or the PEAR Group, only the faults in the structure itself). We need someone who is responsible for things like

As such I propose to make decisions final and binding only from the second its commited to peardoc (it does not yet have to be build to be binding though).

Create a set of groups within PEAR that consist of a similar set of packages (eg: the Web Service Group; the Math Group; the Gtk Group). This is _not_ the same as PEAR categories; two or more categories may be clubbed to form one group. Ideally; we have around 10-15 such groups of 30-40 packages each.

Who decides which packages go into a group? What if there is a dispute (should Console_Getopt go into the command-line parsing group or in the PEAR Installer-related group?), how is that resolved?

Well it would need to be bootstrapped and from then on it would be decided on by the group representatives if its not obvious to which existing group something belongs.

If one developer has a dispute with the group leader and therefore the group that can't be resolved, who do they appeal to?

the council of group representatives.

When do elections happen? How long are terms? Who decides whether a new package is accepted into PEAR?

1 year terms regards, Lukas PS: this discussion solely belongs on pear-dev and not pear-core