Re: Re: !!! Net_SMTP v1.2.4 is broken - please remove urgently !!!

Stefan Neufeind wrote:

On 12 Mar 2004 at 17:33, Lukas Smith wrote:

Stefan Neufeind wrote:

On 12 Mar 2004 at 17:02, Lukas Smith wrote: [...]

well my perception is that everybody wants quality to magically appear, however they are unwilling to accept the consequences, thats why I am suggesting to concentrate on the packages where the maintainer is willing to accept the concequences and not waste our time with the others.

We need to keep PEAR in mind as a whole. And therefor we can't have "good" packages and some that don't react to quality-improvements at all. PEAR has always been promoted as a high-quality repository. What will become if we leave all devs the possibility to choose between a high-quality-PEAR and a care-less-PEAR? Is the care-less-branch of PEAR then becoming to be phpcla**es.org? :-))

some will be higher quality than others. obviously us not spending time with the packages will not mean that those developers are not bound by the PEAR standards.

So as previously suggested by someone, maybe we should involve in bringing more QA-related topic into the docs / into the PEAR standards-part of the manual? Then devs would be bound to the work done by QA :-)) PS: Don't take this suggestion "that" serious, but think if this might save us a lot of work in some parts of QA-work.

actually as Greg noted we should actually get going in this regard. We have a few pieces here and there in the manual as I have noted in a recent mail, but appearently people dont look at them. we should expand the "making a release" section, better link the different pieces like the coding standards and try to add all the group announcements. regards, Lukas Smith smith@backendmedia.com _______________________________ BackendMedia www.backendmedia.com berlin@backendmedia.com Linn Zwoch Smith GbR Pariser Str. 44 D-10707 Berlin Tel +49 30 83 22 50 00 Fax +49 30 83 22 50 07