Re: addition to PEAR2 coding standards that may be controversial

<snip snip..> - see note on when a package is created on pear website....

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 This was the concern - HTML_Template would probably have fitted into this category, and never got off the ground really... - It was never put into the website, correctly so... - Perhaps that means that it should have stayed as a Pepr proposal, rather than registered as a real package..

Thoughts? Otherwise looks fine... Regards Alan

* 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