Re: Moving to a new PEAR website

On 03/05/11 18:29, till wrote: > On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Christian Weiske <cweiske@cweiske.de> wrote: >> Hello Michael, >> >> >>> I propose we replace the existing website at pear.php.net with the >>> new site. >>> >>> Of course the new site is missing several important features, but I >>> think we can move over without them, provided we still make the old >>> site available. The features we would lose are: >>> >>> - docbook documentation integration >>> - phpdocumentor integration >>> - pepr >>> - bug tracker >>> >>> These can all be added to the new site later on. It currently >>> functions quite well without them. >> I am totally against moving pear.php.net away. Totally. It will break >> everything, even if we have rewrite rules. What's the benefit apart >> from "immediate PEAR2 launch"? >> Losing bug tracker and documentation is not something that I would want. >> PEAR2 is also different from PEAR, something that should not be covered. >> >> Raising visibility for PEAR2 - I'd like that. >> Replace the PEAR front page with a fat (half of the page) PEAR2 button, >> and another fat pyrus button. Add a highlighted PEAR2 link in the >> pear.php.net main menu. >> The next thing would be to integrate pear2 docs into pear2.php.net, then >> add pepr, bug tracker (except we use the github one) - but it should be >> linked/integrated nevertheless. >> >> All this, but I'm against moving pear.php.net away. >> >> One issue I see is that people don't know where to look for packages >> now. This could be solved by making pear2 a channel aggregator for >> pear2 and pear1 packages, or by introducing a standalone >> packages.php.net website that is the channel aggregator. It would just >> provide search/listings/ratings for packages. > I agree with Christian. (= +1) > > Till > FWIW, there's also been a lot of community discussion about a channel aggregator: http://blog.stuartherbert.com/php/2011/04/09/gathering-requirements-for-a-pear-channel-aggregator/ Cheers, David