Re: [pear-webmaster] I should maybe point out here..

On Wed Sep 08, 2004 at 04:3801PM +0100, Steph wrote: > Firstly, 'the right to say no'. There's no reason anyone should have to > fill in the personal info parts, but surely the rest is public information? > If someone doesn't fill in their PEAR info, all we have is all you have - > name, username and package info. If they do fill it in, every man and his > dog has access to it. So I'm wondering where this anxiety's coming from.. This has nothing to do with anxiety of any sort, but I can imagine that there are people who are concerned enough about their privacy to object against being mentioned on sites they didn't explicitely subscribe to. > particularly given that I'm about ready to send this long-term project to QA > and it's never been mentioned until now. The reason I didn't mention it was that I've only been thinking about this lately. But I actually don't think that adding such a feature will have any effect on your QA process: The only code that will be changed is on PEAR's side. > Secondly, I asked Martin about this additional table on irc last week, > before I started designing it and all the stuff for both servers to make it > useful. I was left with the impression that this was the way to go I'm afraid I understood you wrong back then: When you asked me about this sort of stuff, I was under the impression that you wanted to set up a new database at zend.com in which people could enter their information. (IIRC I also asked a question like "we are talking about a database at zend.com, no" and got a positive answer. But I'm likely to be wrong.) > There are no fields that will go public if they aren't filled in. There are > no email addresses gathered, much less published. Most of the information > we're gathering here is work-related (or work-seeking-related) information, > _all_ of it beyond name, username and package information is 100% voluntary, > and the vast majority of the people I've spoken to about this project are > keen to see it go live. I don't think there is anyone here who objects against the project. We just want to make sure that it fits in our infrastructure as nicely as possible. -- - Martin Martin Jansen http://martinjansen.com/