Re: [PEAR-DEV] Hosting PEAR's git repositories on git.php.net

>
> Another very basic question is if and why we need central repositories.
>
>  - All code is in one place, which makes tools like commit mails and bug
>   tracker integration (not existing unfortunately) possible
>

I feel that the PEAR bug tracker, while good originally, has unfortunately
been surpassed by a large number of existing platforms that have continued
to innovate where we have not.

I feel that it would be a good candidate to go 'read only' at some point
and be replaced by an alternative, likely based PHP solution that provides
the stats we like and an API to allow integration that we need.

I don't have a specific suggestion as to what would replace it, nor am I
volunteering to do such a thing, but I feel that would be the best long
term outcome for the community.

- Unmaintained packages can be QAed properly without moving the primary
>   repository
>

So, we have this with the pear organisation on github, but we don't have a
syncing strategy. IE: The fork of phpcs when Greg shifted it to its own
organisation turned out to be more of a problem than the value it added.

I would be interested in the idea of a 'pear endorsed' release, while
letting the author do their own thing 99.9% of the time. If it goes off
track, you just fork and endorse someone else's repo.

This can be automated in a very slick fashion, IMO - look at travisci's
travisbot, running tests on pull requests and posting comments.

The fact github provides an API that is enabling this is great. However, if
there was a way to do this level of synching, automation and endorsing *without
github, and just plain git repos*, even better.



> - Central karma/commit control
>
Nice to have, but IMO, not critical. Karma for PEAR releases via the
pear.php.net channel, different story. But let whomever wants to add
developers to their repository do so, I say.

- Users/other devs know exactly where to find the primary code
>   repository
>
> +1 to this one.