Re: hosting packages on external VCS sites

On Mar 19, 2007, at 12:32 AM, Adam Ashley wrote:

On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 15:09:58 -0500, Gregory Beaver <greg@chiaraquartet.net> wrote:

This would mean that if a user is unwilling to host their code at cvs.php.net, we would no longer be willing to host their code at pear.php.net, and that external documentation is simply not allowed unless it is a manual at a registered domain name.

-1 until PEAR gets a decent RCS system. The only reason I put up with the CVS at all is that the packages I maintain have always been there.

IMO this is more religious issue than developer issue. I work with both CVS and SVN and find no problem switching between them. Yes, Subversion is better. Especially with big projects. Then again most PEAR classes are relatively small. Bigger problem is documentation. Writing Docbook is quite painful. Debugging Docbook is painful. Installing own Docbook building environment is painful. I really liked Jon's way of writing docs in rST ( http://docutils.sourceforge.net/rst.html ). I do not know what system Prototype people used. Prototype used to be without decent docs. They cried for help from users to provide some. Now they have great documentation. http://encytemedia.com/blog/articles/2006/10/31/prototype-a-call-for-documentation http://www.prototypejs.org/ jQuery is another project with great docs. They use Wiki. http://docs.jquery.com/Main_Page My point is. To achieve great docs we must have easier way to write them. --

Mika Tuupola                      http://www.appelsiini.net/~tuupola/