Re: Re: [metabase-dev] MDB news

Hello Manuel, * Manuel Lemos wrote: > > No. Perhaps you need some lessons in rhetorics, diplomacy > > and "general rules of constructive discussions". > Never mind. You do not seem to try to understand why I am the way I am Of course I try to understand. But the fact that not so many people are hearing you (you said the opposite, but you haven't proven it) should arouse your attention and perhaps you should think about it and - perhaps - change your attitude a little bit. At least in discussions on PHP mailing lists. > > 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. > It is very naive of you to think that a single code standard assures any > quality. Not solely, of course. But read what Derick said, I fully agree to him in this point. > > 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. > You need to learn a little more about statistics. *lol* > contributing. That is the problem of PEAR. A lot of the qualified > developers do not contribute because PEAR rules make it unviable. May be. But since there is a group of (hopefully growing) people who like to contribute, I don't see any problem. If PEAR would not grow (and infrastructure like PEAR installer or the website that was not in the final stage in the past has forbidden PEAR to grow), I would say you are right. But since PEAR keeps growing (slow, but continuous) I don't see any reasons why this ("A lot of the qualified ...") should be a problem. > >>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). > If you are right handed, would you think it would be fair if your > publisher demanded that you to start writing with the left hand? If I want to get into this project (because it gives me a lot of popularity. It's like publishing a book at O'Reilly) then I would try to start writing with the left hand. [Since I'm left-handed, this wouldn't be so much a problem for me :-) ] > That is > how developers that do not contribute feel. PEAR is not there to please everybody. > >>That sounds pretty much as if you are not interested. > > Persecution mania, part II? > The fact is that you did not answer. I already said numerous times that I'm not not interested. > If you would really be interested > you would have answered soon or later. Manuel, don't try to define how and when I have to answer e-mails from people who sent me e-mails. I'll answer mails when I have the time and when I think it's the right time to do this. > I asked already. I hope that if he is not interested for whatever > reasons he may have, at least be straight and tell me. That would be a > decent posture. <sigh> If we weren't interested, we would have said it to you. Poor Manuel. > >>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. > You have no idea how you are so mistaken. That's right. I'm mistaken at all. :) > >>>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. > I never doubted that. "I said the thread" says that you doubt I have read the thread. > The issue is that from a whole thread you just > comment one message just to make fun of some user that you disagree > with. It's not the right place here to comment all postings. So I picked up some postings, also because I didn't have much time to comment on all. > [...] That way you will not learn and evolve. Yep. I'm so dumb and mistaken. > You need to pay more attention. If the user got the wrong idea about > PEAR, that can only because PEAR people did not care to assure that he > gets the right idea of what PEAR is. Or because the user didn't inform himself about what PEAR is. If the user is too dumb/lazy to read < http://pear.php.net/manual/en/faq.php >, it's not the problem of PEAR or its contributors. > I don't know if you are aware, but PHP objects are indeed made of > associative arrays. Yep, I know that. Do you have a better idea? > > 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. > You are not getting it. He does not want to adapt, so he will not use > it. It may be wrong from your point of view, but he his the one to ARRRRGG. It is not wrong from my point of view. It is OKAY that he does not want to adapt. But I DON'T CARE then about HIS CHOICE. Since he's a free person who can decide on his own, that's okay. I don't have anything about his choice of not contributing to PEAR. That's okay, and PEAR won't cry about it. > > 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. > Your example is very good to remind you that when the European Union was You're missing the topic. > This is more like what I proposed. Respect the style of the original > contributor if he would like that. Why should we? The rules are made by PEAR, and not by the contributor. If he wants to contribute, he has to adapt to the given rules. If not, he can't contribute and that's okay. Nobody won't cry. > >>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. > Bjorn you do not need to sell PHP to me or anybody here. The point is I don't. I only had to correct your claim. > that PHP lacks of serious tools for developing enteprise applications > that are granted to other languages. Which tools? > > That's right, and there's much work to do, but that doesn't > > depend on some fluffy coding styles of PEAR. > Sure, it depends on motivating as many qualified people as possible to > contribute. Who says that PEAR wants to motivate as many qualified people as possible to contribute? I can't it find in the FAQ nor on the website. > Forcing everybody to one style only is counterproductive > regarding that goal. Since it seems not to be the goal of PEAR, it can't be counterproductive. Remember: | What is PEAR? | | PEAR is a repository for high quality PHP code and for PHP extensions | written in C, that are distributed via an easy to use interface system. This ("high quality PHP code") seems to be one of the top #1 goals of PEAR. Of course PEAR wants to attract _many_ developers, but I don't think it's goal #1 to attract _as many_ developers _as possible_ (Stig & Co.: please correct me if I'm wrong). > > Yep. I chose to invest time (15 minutes) to read the > > coding standards and adapt it. It was *my* choice to > > participate in PEAR. > Small classes of course. If you are enjoying so much PEARifying PHP > classes, try helping Lukas PEARifying the rest of the 12,000 lines that Why should I? I'd like to spend my _free_ time with things that *I* want to do. > make the Metabase drivers code. Oh, wait, I read the other message, you > also seem to have a problem with Metabase! <?> Haven't said that. Persecution mania, part V? > > 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. > If my classes had only 100 lines of actual code, 15 minutes would not be > a problem. Then you have to think about it if the work of PEARifying your large code would give you or others an advantage by using your PEArifyed code. If you think "Yes, it's worth to do it", then do it. If you think "No, I have to spend 500 man hours to PEARify it and perhaps nobody will use it since it's such a special class [for example], so I won't PEARify it", then you won't do it and everybody will be happy. > You are very funny. You keep bringing the PHPClasses vs. PEAR issue, and > then you claim that I have a persecution mania. Is it my impression or > you really want to keep teasing me? No, I don't want to tease you. > > 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. > Only on your mind quality is measured by style. I haven't said that I solely think that quality can be achieved by style. It is *one* (IMHO important) part of getting quality on a long-term basis. > PEAR is the only repository sanctioned by the PHP group. If PEAR does > not evolve with the best contributions that could be made, be sure that > the whole PHP community looses opportunities. You miss the goals of PEAR. Read the FAQ, please. > > 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. > If you believe that looks are more important than brains that should > make sense to you. See above: code quality/coding style is one important part of getting quality on a long-term basis. > > Yes, as I said, having such votes would be overblown. > Why? Are you afraid that a democratic vote process actually demonstrates > that the community does not agree with the rules set by the PEAR elite? Buahahaahahahahahahahahaha. Manuel, it's always nice to see that you think you're always right and that you assume that you're the navel of the world. Please think about the possibility that _perhaps_ a democratic vote process would demonstrate that "the community" (I hope you won't define the community only of the people who are voting) does agree with the rules. Just think about that this _could_ be possible. > >>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? > Always the tone excuse to avoid the subject... If I would say "You're an asshole" and would also say "Oh, sorry about the tone, but that's who I am, I don't want to tease you, and for discussing my tone should really be irrelevant. Please don't mind if I say you're an asshole, it's really not relevant for the discussion, but I have to say that, I'm so sorry", wouldn't you also say that I should adapt my tone? > > Maybe, but that's not the point. The point is that you would > > behave the same. > You have no idea of the PHP Classes site approval process. In details it's not important for the discussion. -- 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