Re: Re: [PEPr] Comment on Web Services::Services_Digg
| From: | Mark Wiesemann | Date: | Sun, 22 Apr 2007 19:31:25 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: [PEPr] Comment on Web Services::Services_Digg | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-46391@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Hi Greg,
Gregory Beaver write:
I see no merit in rejecting a well-written, useful, unit-tested, documented package because nobody in PEAR has bothered to port a *working* package to a slightly different coding grammar and new API.I also see no merit. But as this RFC was accepted with 16 votes (including your +1 as conditional), we can't ignore it. Finding a good solution for this issue with Services_Digg is definitely needed, as you pointed out in your other email. IMO we shouldn't just break the rule (from the RFC) just for this proposal. The better way is IMO to reword the RFC and to find a good compromise for new packages. Regards, Mark -- http://www.markwiesemann.eu