Re: addition to PEAR2 coding standards that may be controversial

Alan Knowles wrote: > Getting there = It needs to be laid out as bullet points, there is > alot of information in that single paragraph, It also needs expanding > a little. > > > Packages can be proposed either as > a) A completed, or relatively complete package to Pepr > b) A concept, or proof of concept to svn.pear.php.net/concepts [?? use > a subdirectory/different repo for them ??] > > For concept packages they should > = Be approved on the mailing list by??? before being accepted into the > concept directory > = Undergo a review [??what exactly does this mean?? = a Pepr vote??] > by the collective when going from Alpha to Beta?? > = Pepr may be used by the collective to vote on package [?? at what > point - paragraph below is vauge - is a one vote needed for API, docs > etc.??] > = [At what point should the be put into the 'release system'] How's this look: ===Package acceptance into PEAR2=== Packages can be proposed either as 1) A completed, or relatively complete package to Pepr 2) A concept, or proof-of-concept to svn.pear.php.net/PEAR2/alpha For proof-of-concept packages they should * Post a public notice to the pear-dev mailing list stating the intention to begin development * Request a new package be created on the pear.php.net website * Undergo a review by the collective (as defined in the previous section) when ready to move from alpha to beta stability * Once the review is complete, the package developers may request an official vote by the collective on whether the package is ready. The vote is conducted through PEPr. Unsuccessful packages may request a second review after fixing issues noted by the collective. * Successful packages may then move their development directly from svn.pear.php.net/PEAR2/alpha into svn.pear.php.net/PEAR2 using svn move Here are the latest drafts: http://wiki.pear.php.net/index.php/PEAR2_Standards http://wiki.pear.php.net/index.php/Controversial_Changes Greg