Re: merging Controversial changes back into PEAR2 Standards

On 9/22/07, Gregory Beaver <greg@chiaraquartet.net> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I would like to take a quick straw poll to gauge your approval or > disapproval of the controversial changes currently separate from the > PEAR2 standards. How do you feel about merging the controversial > changes back into the official PEAR2 coding standards proposal? > > Please respond to this question with +1 for "strongly agree" 0 for > "don't care either way, and "-1" for "strongly disagree." Anyone > may > vote and all opinions have equal weight. The straw poll will be used to > determine how to proceed, and is simply intended to check on how we've > done with improving the proposal to address concerns raised when it was > originally proposed and after. > > Links: > http://wiki.pear.php.net/index.php/Controversial_Changes > http://wiki.pear.php.net/index.php/PEAR2_Standards > > Basically, these three things would again become part of the PEAR2 > coding standards and community standards proposal: > > * eliminate require_once/include_once/require/include from PEAR > packages as a means of loading classes, and instead rely upon users to > either use PEAR2_Autoload or a customized loading solution of their own > creation > * recommend using class_exists() to throw an exception with helpful > error message when loading drivers [this is optional, and would be a > recommendation, not a requirement] > * use import statements at the top of the file to declare dependencies > explicitly 1) +1 2) -1 3) +1 - Helgi