Lukas Smith has posted a "stream dump" of some of the thoughts he's had lately about the status of the emPHPower project including its organization and the potential popularity of the group.

I think the general idea of establishing a communication hub for core developers, end users and companies has been received with sufficient enthusiasm to start working on some of the boring details. The next logical step seems to be to start to fleshing out how the organization behind this communication hub should be structured. I want to leave as much power as possible with the individual members, which is one of the main reasons why I do not want companies to be come members.

He focuses on what he calls the "bootstrapping process" - the formation of the initial core group, opening the organization up for signups from the community, the creation of a constitution and the role of the core PHP developers in the group.

Joshua Eichorn is asking for your opinion. He wants some feedback from the community - both PEAR users and not - on how to make what PEAR has to offer even better.

If you were a member of the PEAR group what would you change about PEAR. Please keep in mind were not an all powerful body (Read the constitution for details), but we do have the ability to set policy, and like in any open source project we can make changes through our direct actions.

One comment has already been made with three points: the bundling of PEAR modules into applications, the introduction of a lightweight database layer and making some of the package dependencies a little lighter.

Joshua Eichorn is asking for your opinion. He wants some feedback from the community - both PEAR users and not - on how to make what PEAR has to offer even better.

If you were a member of the PEAR group what would you change about PEAR. Please keep in mind were not an all powerful body (Read the constitution for details), but we do have the ability to set policy, and like in any open source project we can make changes through our direct actions.

One comment has already been made with three points: the bundling of PEAR modules into applications, the introduction of a lightweight database layer and making some of the package dependencies a little lighter.

In a quick post to his blog, Lukas Smith notes his support of the recent announcement of the PEAR elections.

I am confident that both of the proposals will help in improving collaboration in PEAR, mainly because they basically provide the same organization we used to have for all of PEAR (which worked great in the beginning), now for categories of related packages.

He reasons that, since PEAR is such a huge project, it needs this kind of approach - a method to the madness - to help keep the project on the right path.

In a quick post to his blog, Lukas Smith notes his support of the recent announcement of the PEAR elections.

I am confident that both of the proposals will help in improving collaboration in PEAR, mainly because they basically provide the same organization we used to have for all of PEAR (which worked great in the beginning), now for categories of related packages.

He reasons that, since PEAR is such a huge project, it needs this kind of approach - a method to the madness - to help keep the project on the right path.

Greg Beaver has announced an "official referendum on the future of PEAR" that he has set in motion to get PEAR developers voting on proposals for where PEAR should be going.

As of February 22, 2007, I have called an official referendum on the future of PEAR. There is a news item on the front page of pear.php.net with the same instructions in this message. This election is only open to PEAR developers who have contributed to the development of a PEAR package at any time in history, but you must have the ability to log in at pear.php.net, and must have "pear.dev" karma.

There's three options - "don't change anything", Greg's constitution, or Anant Narayanan's constitution. The results will pick the path that PEAR will follow and the future of the project. If you have access and the pear.dev karma, head over here and cast your vote today.

Greg Beaver has announced an "official referendum on the future of PEAR" that he has set in motion to get PEAR developers voting on proposals for where PEAR should be going.

As of February 22, 2007, I have called an official referendum on the future of PEAR. There is a news item on the front page of pear.php.net with the same instructions in this message. This election is only open to PEAR developers who have contributed to the development of a PEAR package at any time in history, but you must have the ability to log in at pear.php.net, and must have "pear.dev" karma.

There's three options - "don't change anything", Greg's constitution, or Anant Narayanan's constitution. The results will pick the path that PEAR will follow and the future of the project. If you have access and the pear.dev karma, head over here and cast your vote today.