On Sun, Oct 12, 2025 at 5:30 AM Pierre Joye <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 12, 2025 at 2:13 AM Jakub Zelenka <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Ok so I guess the current status is kind on unknown... :) But as noted
> by Rowan in other email, there's a mention of the PEAR Group that is the
> governing body of the project although seems expired so I have really no
> idea what the governance there is and if the RFC process should have any
> power over that project.
> >
> >> > I don't think that any current core developer has access to their GH
> organizattion. Or do you still have access / control to do any changes
> there and make it deprecated? My main issue with this RFC is that it's
> about project that we don't effectively control and I'm not sure here is
> anyone who can make any such change to it. From what I see it's currently
> maintained by Chuck who, I guess, also control the project. Or am I wrong?
> >>
> >> I do have access, I did not check the role tho'.
> >>
> >
> > I guess this is really the crucial part here. Are you able / willing /
> comfortable to potentially update the website or the tool if we approve the
> RFC about deprecation and are you sure that the current maintainer is ok
> with that (basically respect RFC as the governance method for PEAR)?
>
> To make it simple, PEAR is part of the PHP projects. There was a
> separate group to do the admin work, security releases when needed,
> sync with php releases to bundle it, etc.
>
> For the purpose of fading out pear, and, more importantly, pecl, we
> can handle it here using the normal RFC flow. Most of the group
> members are barely (f.e. me) or not active at all anymore.
>

 Ok, if you say so and can make such change, I think we should put this RFC
back for discussion.

Kind regards

Jakub

Reply via email to