The whole point of PECL is that its lifetime is completely independent of PHP.
Right. Now will you please go back to the questions I originally asked?
| At present there are some PDO drivers relying on PECL source, and others
| relying on their php-src/ext directories. All that does is mess up builds
| where PHP and PECL are out of sync. It needs to be either one or the
| other... given that this is the most recent PHP distro (5.1.3) 'out of the
| box', which should it be?
|
| Basically this - and the matter of built-in anythings - comes down to the
| question of the way PECL is viewed. If it's intended purely as a
| development area, then a PECL extension released with/alongside a PHP
| distro should be the current stable release appropriate to that PHP
| version, and whether it's built as static or not shouldn't be considered
| majorly important. In that scenario, the snaps box should be clearly
| marked as a development tool and should _only_ build shared extensions,
| using a current PECL CVS branch corresponding to the appropriate PHP CVS
| branch. The only time most PHP users would know snaps even exists would be
| when they'd reported a bug and were testing a fix for it.
|
| On the other hand, if the intention is that it should always be possible
| for users to upgrade extensions via the snaps box without also upgrading PHP,
| then the PHP build _needs_ to be synched with the relevant PECL CVS branch
| (regardless of its development status), and every extension not regarded
| as reliably stable _needs_ to be built as shared - whether this happens to be
| as part of a PHP distro build or not.
|
--Wez.