Re: Some PEAR remarks

Hello, Martin Jansen wrote: > > On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 15:55:29 +0200, Vincent Oostindie wrote: > > >On Thu, 18 Apr 2002 02:08:47 +0200, Jason Lotito wrote: > >>> A question in advance: why are member variables in PEAR prefixed with a > >>> '_'? Sure this is useful in languages like Java or C++ where it's > >>> hard > >>> to see which variable is a local one, an argument or a member, but in > >>> PHP this distinction is already clear: all member variables are > >>> prefixed with '$this->' inside a method. And if you use proper > >>> encapsulation, member variables are never accessed from anywhere else. > >>> (And very, very sadly, this is not the case in the PEAR library!) > >> > >> http://pear.php.net/manual/en/standards.naming.php > > > >I know that they're following a standard, but I question the standard, not > >the fact that PEAR uses it :-) > > The coding standards have been questioned by a lot people so far, > but they all did not succeed :-). A project like PEAR simply needs > some guidelines concerning the coding style and we will not change > them just because there are some people that don't like them. > Please search the mailing list archives (http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/) > for the flame wars and endless dicussions concerning this point. > > PLEASE don't start a yet another useless coding standard discussion. You are missing Vicent's points. Vincent bothered to spend time and analyse PEAR code. Then he bothered to write a fully justified message with the criticisms that he sees as appropriate according to pondered points of view. What does Vincent get for that? Hostitlity, hostility and hostility! This is a very consistent pattern of PEAR people. Several people came here and bothered to express points of view, many of them very similar to PEAR, and instead of listening and acting upon that, all you do is mute peoples argument as if you were ready to become irredutable about this regardless of how consistent the arguments are. Vincent was very clear. He said he would like to adopt PEAR but not in its current shape and then he justified his points. Like Vincent, several other people came here and explained why PEAR unflexible aspects are preventing them to adopt it. Your reception to all the people is the same, rejection. This message is not meant to be answered now by you or anybody else here. This message is just an encouragement for you to think about the following points: - How many Vincents more does it take until you start listening? - What else does it take for you to understand that PEAR is not having acceptance now, if ever? - How many years more does it take until PEAR is accepted in the PHP community as a mature resource of ready to use components for PHP developers? Suggestions to follow: - Elect a leader with free time and real motivation to do proper coordination of PEAR developements. - Stop coding and elaborate a plan to follow from where you are now and where to go in the future. - Do not exclude people nor let individual members monopolize efforts to prevent others to participate. - Loose the rules or else only an elite of few PHP users will be interested to participate. PHP community has grown because (intentionally or not) it provided opportunities for everybody to benefit from it. PEAR and its user community will not grow until you adjust your attitude to match this spirit. Regards, Manuel Lemos