RE: [PEAR] Http_Upload

Hi Marcos, the way PEAR is organized has its pros and cons. Of course development is slower with only one or a handful of developers who - of course - have got to do something for their living and don't always have the time. But on the other hand it's more organized than if a lot of people are working on the same package - this usually creates confusion. I think the pros of PEAR have got the upper hand because if you look at phpclasses.org there are various classes for the same task which is not ideal - PEAR tries to solve this problem by only providing one unified package for each type of task. The only downside seems to be a bit too much bureaucracy, e.g. getting a PEAR CVS account takes its time and so on. But overall PEAR is a fantastic project and should be supported even if it's sometimes frustrating if proposals are not recognized immediately. Regards, Torsten > -----Original Message----- > From: Marcos Neves [mailto:maka3d@yahoo.com.br] > Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 10:57 PM > To: Torsten Roehr; Stefan Neufeind > Cc: Randum Ian; pear-general@lists.php.net; ian@randumian.co.uk > Subject: RE: [PEAR] Http_Upload > > > I don't know about pear politic, but I think PEAR is not like > phpclasses.org ( a repository of classes ) > but a group that try to optimize the packages to the minimum > possible, try > to use a name convention, > and code style to a default. I think documentation must mandatory as BUG > FIXING and UPDATEs. > Open Source does not means only that it's free, but for me, it means that > we can have a comunity > working on the same project. A package with only one developer is > harder to > Maintain than a team doing it! > I look at the excelent Bug Tracking System that PEAR has, and have the > shame to see open bugs since > october03. > > What do you people think? > > and sorry my english. > > At 22:40 19/2/2004 +0100, Torsten Roehr wrote: > >Hi Stefan, > > > >I proposed some changes a few days ago on the list and also sent them to > >Tomas directly but didn't receive any response. A pity... > > > > > >Regards, > > > >Torsten > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Stefan Neufeind [mailto:stefan@neufeind.net] > > > Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 10:25 PM > > > To: Marcos Neves > > > Cc: Randum Ian; pear-general@lists.php.net; ian@randumian.co.uk > > > Subject: Re: [PEAR] Http_Upload > > > > > > > > > Well, collect your suggestions and simply email the package-lead, as > > > a first step. I know Tomas has been quite busy in the last time, but > > > please try to negotiate with him which needs need fixes and cleanups. > > > > > > http://pear.php.net/package/HTTP_Upload > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > Stefan > > > > > > On 19 Feb 2004 at 15:58, Marcos Neves wrote: > > > > > > > I think Http_Upload need a revision and bugs fix. The class is too > > > > old, use old functions, has design problem and a series of bugs. > > > > > > > > I could do those updates and submit the file to somebody > authorized do > > > > the upgrade on pear server. :) > > > > > > > > At 10:39 19/2/2004 +0000, Randum Ian wrote: > > > > >Hi guys, > > > > > > > > > >Just joined the list today after dabbling with PEAR for the first > > > > >time last night. > > > > > > > > > >I have a couple of questions about the Http_Upload package > but please > > > > >bear with me if the questions appear a little simple! I am learning > > > > >all the time! > > > > > > > > > >Why does the script convert the filename into a generated one? Is > > > > >this security etc? Is there a resource somewhere that gives the > > > > >different configuration options or are they just what is > commented in > > > > >the file? > > > > > > -- > > > PEAR General Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/) > > > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > > > > > >-- > >PEAR General Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/) > >To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- > PEAR General Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >