Re: Re: [metabase-dev] MDB news

Hi Manuel, > > What gives you the impression that I don't see you > > with good faith? (To give you some positive statement: > It is the sense that I get from you challenging me to demonstrate that > what I do is for the benefit of PHP, when it is pretty much public and > you know about it. Be sure: I see you with good faith. > > I liked the discussion on PHP-DEV about SOAP/Web Services > > some months ago. I liked your postings, but only one part > > of them: the fact that you see SOAP/web services as an > > important thing. Nevertheless I didn't like the tone of > > your mails.) > Yes, the tone is often use as an excuse to refute what I propose. No. Perhaps you need some lessons in rhetorics, diplomacy and "general rules of constructive discussions". > > Nothing. > So, why can't I tell you about PHP Classes as something that I do for > the benefit of PHP? Because there should be other things as something that you do for the benefit of PHP. > >>have decided on their own to exclude themselves from participating in > >>it. It is their choice, so it is their problem. > > Yep. And the same is for those developers who don't like > > the PEAR coding standard and so they exclude themselves > > from participating in it. It is their choice, so it is > > their problem. > No, it is not just their problem, is a problem of the whole PHP > community. The PHP Classes site is an initiative of an individual that > is not sanctioned by the PHP Group and it is not assumed to become the And because PEAR is "sanctioned by the PHP Group" or comes officially with the PHP distribution, there's a huge liability of PEAR and its developers to produce code/packages with a good *quality* in mind. You are only talking about *quantity*. On the one hand it is right (i.e. to be accepted you need many packages), on the other hand not because PEAR should be of a good quality. And coding standards are one point where good quality counts. > assumed.PEAR will hardly become such standard library by > circunstancially excluding many qualified developers from contributing. A qualified developer is able to change the coding style. And, as somebody told in another mail, there seems to be code formatting tools where you can easily change the style (haven't tried it yet). > >>Either you did not notice the > > ... I didn't have the time to answer you. And as told in another > That sounds pretty much as if you are not interested. Persecution mania, part II? > The opportunity is for a fair banner exchange like it was accepted by > the PHP-CON marketing people. So, if you are interested, just reply to > me privately on this subject. Just ask Frank Stepan, he's the one who decides that. > > I refer to the tone. If somebody wants to be heard by somebody, > > he has to adapt to a factual tone. > The tone is intentionally meant to bring the attention of people that > otherwise would avoid the subject as have done before. As you can see (and you should have learned about it in the past), this doesn't work. > >>My point is to provide feedback about the way people are seeing PEAR. If > >>you think that is just me, go and read the comp.lang.php thread about > >>why people do not want to use PEAR. I intentionally excluded myself from > > I have read this thread and loughed out loudly. > I said the thread, not just a single message. Manuel, please read my lips: I HAVE READ THE WHOLE THREAD. > Anyway, if avoid trying to understand why a few users do not use PEAR, I don't avoid it. > > Yeah, a real professional user. He doesn't have "time" to dig into > > the _use_ of the PEAR classes (on the other side, you need to bring > > time with you if you want to *commit* PEAR classes, but this user > > wanted to _use_ PEAR classes). > AFAIK, this user never meant to be a contributor. He was explaining why > he did not want to become a user. Yep. But this is not a reason why PEAR folks should be responsible for that. > > Also, he obviously hasn't seen some bigger OO projects/frameworks where > > one class relies to another, i.e. as PHPLib Auth class does (relying > > on PHPLIB::Session, PHPLIB::DB and PHPLIB:CT_* class) > Moderate dependence is understandable. However, forcing a dependendance > on fat base classes like it is required in PEAR is often inappropriate Which fat base classes do you mean? And what does "fat" in your eyes mean? > > The next professional user. Why does he think that he's the navel > > of the world and everything else has to follow _his_ style? Reality > > is bottom-up: if _you want to use_ another thing, you have to adapt > > to the thing's style, and not the other way round. > That is why he and many other people are not using PEAR. Yep. But don't you see that this is a *WRONG* attitude? If you WANT TO USE other things, YOU have to adapt to their styles. That's the same like on social groups: if you have a group A and an outsider B who wants to be part of group A, what does he have to do? Right, he has to adapt to the rules the group A has chosen. If he doesn't want to adapt, he remains an outsider. Same for countries: if you want to live here in Germany, you have to adapt to local rules. If not, you're an outsider. The same counts for every other country in the world. > > Obviously he doesn't know that PHP already entered the enterprise > > market. > PHP has little credibility to enter in the entreprise market like other Since I'm working in the enterprise market, be sure: PHP already entered it. > languages did. That's right, and there's much work to do, but that doesn't depend on some fluffy coding styles of PEAR. > >>>like those things), but it's not true thinking using these words > >>>will change anything in the heads of the developers. > >>I would not be that sure. > > Then prove it. > I won't bother to give examples, but you may want to try to pay more > attention to what happens after many heated discussions that I participated. Prove the above or shut up. > > Why do you think that it is a problem for me? Are you so much > > suffering from a persecution mania that you always try to lay > > words into my mouth that I haven't written? > You wrote that you have the impression that I am looking for the site to > have the greatest acceptance as if that is a problem for you. To be sure > that is what you mean I asked. Be sure: I don't have any problems with it. > > I only said that I have the *impression* that you *tend* to > > see phpclasses as the navel of the world. It is not a problem > > for me, since I can ignore it and I or my dayly life don't > > suffer from it. But the impression stands out. > Bjorn, you were the one that brought the PHP Classes site to this > thread. You do not seem to ignore it and it seems that you are making a > big deal out of it as if that is a problem for you. Buahahahahahaahhahaah. Persecution mania, part III? (Stab I - III) I only touched the discussion in one point to "PHP classes". The discussion itself is not concentrated on "PHP classes". > I wish people stop having sick feelings against the site that after all > is a good thing for the PHP community. However, it seems that some > people keep bringing the site to the discussions that I am envolved some > times with the intention to attack the things that I do. Persecution mania, part IV? > > I don't think so. Also you may not forget that the > > "PEAR el3333333t" is very helpful. I can remember > > Martin Jansen helping me commiting the PEARifyed > > PHPLIB Template class (thanks Martin!) some months > > ago. So I don't think the "PEAR el3333333t" is trying > > to keep people out. > That doesn't avoid the fact that you had to spend time starting to > PEARify the code yourself. Yep. I chose to invest time (15 minutes) to read the coding standards and adapt it. It was *my* choice to participate in PEAR. > continue productive using the PEAR style. Like I said, if you are > right-handed, it would be like making you write with left hand from now on. Then just don't contribute. Nobody forces you to do that. If you want to contribute, you know what you have to do (invest 15 minutes to read and understand the coding styles and then some more minutes to hours to adapt your existing code that you want to contribute). If that's too much work for you, that's okay. And, I think you can't compare PHP classes and PEAR: PHP classes is open for everything (like CPAN and perhaps it lacks of a medium quality like CPAN does because it accepts everything in (even bad) every coding style). PEAR is open for everything, but it wants to assure that the quality of the code will remain on one level. That's the main big difference. > >>You make it sound as if developers have the duty to conform to rules > >>that they are not paid to work by, as if they are obligated to > >>contribute. Since they are not obligated to contribute at all, obviously > >>you will see a lot of qualified developers refusing to contribute. > > So what? Is this the problem of PEAR? No. > It is a problem of the PHP community and its future. Why? > > 1.) It's always easy to criticise things _after_ they were created. > > 2.) It's more productive (and it's harder so that may be the reason > > why people like you are preferring 1.) to criticise things during > > the _process of creation_. > I suggested to be more flexible allowing the code to preserve the > original style of the contributor if he is not willing to convert. I was > not heard. See above: if PEAR opened it's coding rules to be more flexible (how much?), I doubt the quality of the code would be the same and on one level. > > The democratic process was the discussion on this list. In my > > opinion, having Usenet rules (for example) like RfD/CfV would > > be overblown. > There was no vote, just opinions exchanged. Yes, as I said, having such votes would be overblown. > > I can repeat myself again: everyone who decides not to > > contribute to PEAR has made a choice. That's okay. But > > that's the problem of the developer and not for PEAR. > > If some rules have to be re-thought, I trust the > > "PEAR el3333333t" will do that. > The subject was brought over and over again and the PEAR elite remains > inflexible. Who brought the subject over and (if it was you) in which tone? > > I think the same would be okay for phpclasses, wouldn't > > it? So if somebody would refuse to contribute to phpclasses > > for reason X and Y, you would also say "That's okay. You made > > a choice not contributing to phpclasses. It's your problem, > > not the problem of phpclasses", wouldn't you? > Sure, but the difference is that the site does not require anybody to > change their classes to contribute. Maybe, but that's not the point. The point is that you would behave the same. -- Wenn mit der Website das Herz Ihres Unternehmens aus dem Takt kommt. Wenn das kleine Problem vom Montag am Freitag vor dem RollOut ein grosses ist. * team@thinkphp.de Wir helfen Ihnen. Innerhalb von 2 Stunden. * 0931/78 43 804