RE: [PEAR] Http_Upload

To you all, Marcos and Torsten especially, we know about the current "coordination problems" that exist in PEAR. And we also know that something has to be done about it. That's why not too long ago the PEAR QA team has been formed. We're working to get the repository improved and keep the bug-count down. However it's not good practice to do QA-actions on a package that is still actively maintained. That's why I asked if you already mailed Tomas and how long it's been ago. Marcos, it would surely be nice and helpful if you would volunteer to work on the HTTP_Upload-bugs. Please file patch-files to the bug- reports. And I asure the PEAR-qa-team will take care of it. Kind regards, Stefan On 19 Feb 2004 at 23:20, Torsten Roehr wrote: > 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?