Re: PEAR group elections - 2011?

See response inline: On 1 May 2011 19:07, Alain Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> wrote: > On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 07:53:37PM +0200, Bertrand Mansion wrote: > >> But in my opinion, at the moment it's too difficult to submit a new package. >> By difficult, I mean it is time consuming and involves a lot of bureaucracy >> and a lot of prior knowledge of the process. There is also too much > This is something that has been identified and the source of our headaches for a good few years. In PEAR2 for instance, getting the code in the repo and distributing it is much easier and the barrier of entry is much lower. We need to push and make things move for PEAR2. > Yes - I can vouch for that. I have tried to raise some interest in a new package, > a smarty renderer for quickform2 (there is one for quickform - version 1).. > I followed, as far as I could tell, the rules - put up a proposal and was almost > completely ignored. The comments that I have received have been supportive, but > I have a feeling that most people are apathetic. > >       >  http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=653 > > It works, I have been using it for over a year - one or two others have as well. > > What do I do to progress this ? > >> confusion about what is Pyrus (never heard of that), Phar, PEAR 1, PEAR 2, >> Pear package manager, PHP5 support, Namespace support, PEAR Exception, PEAR >> Error, etc, etc. Personally, if I had to contribute a new PEAR package >> today, I wouldn't know where to start. So if you could simplify the process I definitely can vouch for that. The only thing is that it requires time and most of the previously active contributors have been very busy for the past months (Including the president ;)) As a side-note for Daniel, I have tried contacting ZF, SF, Cake, etc within the last year to work on bringing the general purpose packages to PEAR instead of having all frameworks replicating and duplicating work. The only ones that replied were Zend Framework and Lithium. ZF was interested but some company politics got in the way of such "movement". I will reach out to Matthew and make sure we can help them as much as possible with their pear-ifaction of the modules. Regarding other projects, I will keep attempting to contact them and see if a discussion/dialog could happen. The pear-ifaction of general purpose libraries is something Matthew Weier O'Phinney and I have been talking for the past 2 years since the original PSR meeting in Chicago and it is something I feel very strongly about and not only because I'm president of PEAR but also because I had having to learn new APIs doing the same thing when I change framework. There are packages that belong in their respective frameworks and there are packages that belong to the general public (PEAR). It is our duty as developers and PEAR contributors to take the reign and help people achieve it. Regarding the installer, this is something we need to get moving as well however there are important things to be done for the installer and little people to help. I'd ask everyone that is interested in helping, to join us and unite forces. For instance, using Pyrus it is super easy to create a package just by doing "php pyrus.phar generate-pear2" and "php pyrus.phar make". There's no need for the developers to even know what goes in the package.xml now. There has been some movement lately and I'd really love to see more of it! I might not be on IRC but feel free to ping me at ANY time if you'd like to discuss or ask me anything. Looking forward to seeing some more movement ;) -- David Coallier