Re: Extensions moved to PECL

* Thus wrote Gabor Hojtsy: > >I'm currently going through all the extensions that have been moved > >out of the bundled php and into PECL, and making sure that they've > >all been noted about the move. Should we also provide a link > >directly to the package with something like: > > > > url.pecl.package;yaz > > Yep, it will probably be a good idea. The installation part of the > references should note that the extension is available from PECL. > Bundled extensions should not have this note :) ok.. now you've go me confused :) All of the current 'notes' are in the introduction, should I move them all down to the installation section? For informational purposes here is a little matrix of what is documented: name note packagelink ------ ---- ----------- DOM-XML PDFlib XSLTA x crack x db mcal x qtdom x notes x yaz x zip -- Not seen in any logs.. manually found in cvs: nam age note packagelink ------ ---- ---- ----------- cyrus 13 months swf 13 months bidi 16 months vpopmail 21 months x x tclink 23 months dbplus 2 years mailparse 2 years x x imuscat 2 years phpdoc 2 years ? x = confirmed (based on current web documentation) ? = unable to confirm Curt -- First, let me assure you that this is not one of those shady pyramid schemes you've been hearing about. No, sir. Our model is the trapezoid!