[binarycloud-dev] Re: BinaryCloud should be let into PEAR with others as well.... my 2cents

[Alex B. <en...@tu...>]

>> Stig Bakken wrote:
>>> I don't really have any strong opinions on this, so I'll go with
>>> the majority.
>> 
>>   Okay, since we decided not to add application frameworks like
>> PHPLIB to PEAR I'm strongly against adding binarycloud.

Huh?

Last news I had was PHPlib was in the process of being integrated? Maybe I
missed something...

>>   Sebastian Bergmann

I agree with Stig on this. If the pear community doesn't want that, I agree.

but and to continue...
(if you want the three second version, I think applications frameworks are
fine in PEAR so long as they do not dictate to pear, and meet the coding
requirements)

> I don't understand what it would hurt to add binary cloud, I only see how,
> in the end it would help, by making PEAR seem to many as something more
> worthwhile. It seems that ultimately what stands in the way of widespread
> use of PEAR in the first place is a lack of ease to use the system and set
> it up. (I am speaking as someone who is not a seasoned programmer but a web
> designer who found himself in a position where he had to learn web
> programming). PHP itself has met with great success, I would argue primarily
> due to the support (an online manual that is extremely useful), as well as
> its flexibility and ease of use.

I agree to a certain extent, though binarycloud is not your perfect example
of ease-of-use. it requires a good deal of setup and config, because it's a
beefy system.

I haven't see anyony on the list say "no, don't add it" so I'm not sure what
this is in reply to (did I miss something?)

> PEAR on the other hand, while valuable, and I see a lot of potential for it,
> I don't see it gaining widespread use until people who are not necesarily
> coming from a programming background (such as myself) see it as easy to use,

I disagree 100%.

PEAR is serious s*it, which is exactly what php needs. This kind of
development (pear and binarycloud and I'm sure others) requires discipline,
and it's complex stuff.

While I agree that some of the tools should be "easy" to use because they
are clearly defined and well documented, I am not interested in making
things "easy" for their own sake.

I'm speaking for bc here, though I would venture to guess that the pear
people feel sort of the same way.

> impliment, and see a real use for it. As it stands there are other database
> abstraction layers out there, there are other classes available that give
> the average developer all they would need, so their it no real need for PEAR
> for most people unless they are a die hard coder, or programmer, or are just
> sympathetic to the cause.

That is ostensibly true.

But: when I went looking for serious, pluggable chunks of code before I
thought of binarycloud, I didn't find much.

So I went about creating a means for that to happen. As it happens, PEAR is
doing stuff I'm not: pear doesn't do system design, it does high quality
libraries, which fits perfectly with binarycloud. binarycloud will actually
rely on a number of PEAR libs (but that's another thread) :)

> However, make room for application frameworks for binary cloud and the like,
> and keep those separate somehow from the core of PEAR, but at least allow
> them in somwhow, and now you have something that many, I mean MANY people
> would be very interested in.

That I agree with.

Inclusion should not necessarily mean "endorsement" it should mean "base set
of quality requirements met"

> I don't see why we could not somehow make room for other application
> frameworks like binary cloud. After all, if they are based on top of PEAR it
> only makes sense to me, especially if someone is willing to spend the time
> to port them over. At the least, I argue it could not hurt, only help in the
> long run, both those interested in developing binary cloud and those
> interested in developing PEAR. As it stands we have all this effor going in
> two different directions, seems such a waste. Personally I would love to see
> it.

Actually, not.

I danced around pear for a bit to make sure we weren't doing duplicative
things - we are a _little_ with some of the binarycloud core classes, but
otherwise I intend to rely on PEAR quite extensively for caching, error
handling, and many, many other miscellaneous tasks.

There is a small amount of "conflict" but I view it as so small as to be
negligible.

The code in pear is written with discipline - which is something the php
community badly needs.

-alex