Re: PEAR Group Election: Call For Nominations
| From: | Chuck Burgess | Date: | Sat, 17 May 2008 05:20:33 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: PEAR Group Election: Call For Nominations | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-50120@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Ok, count me in too.
Regarding experience...
I've been in the PHP world for just two years, coming from Java and more
during the previous ten years. I'm one of the new kids around PEAR, as I
got involved once I'd become a maintainer for PhpDocumentor in late 2006,
and I've been a daily presence on the #pear IRC channel ever since. As part
of this spring's new Bug Triage effort, I've taken over several unmaintained
packages, so my scope within PEAR continues to grow. My key work over the
remainder of this year will revolve around license changes for most of the
XML packages, building up test coverage of those packages, and tackling
their bugs. I'm hoping this work will eventually earn me a spot on the QA
team.
Regarding goals...
I see the core goals for the next Group to be looking to the future (with
the PEAR2 rollout alongside PHP 5.3) and looking back (get our "house in
order" by improving the QA aspects in PEAR1). Most of my own personal PEAR
work over the next year will be in stabilizing, and in some cases bringing
to closure, those PEAR1 packages I've taken responsibility for. Since many
PEAR1 packages will continue to be relied upon even into the PEAR2 world,
they will continue to require care and feeding. Given that *continuous
integration* is the key area of development where my heart is, I will be a
strong advocate for the QA goals that Christian has already mentioned.
Regarding strengths...
The key observation I can make about myself, looking at my experiences with
the various groups I've worked in during the last decade, is that I'm a
beneficial sounding board during discussions. Even when I don't have direct
expert knowledge about the topic being discussed, my diverse experience
helps me to ask questions that require others to sometimes rearrange their
arguments in order to apply them from a different perspective... sometimes
this means playing devil's advocate, and sometimes it only means forcing the
arguer to better explain their argument in simpler terms. For the most
part, this added breadth to the discussions prove beneficial. I think this
is the key benefit that I can offer to the Group.
--
CRB