Re: About that PECL versioning thing

On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 2:34 PM, Steph Fox <steph@zend.com> wrote: > Hi, > > > >> The first step in fixing the core<->pecl relationship? \o/ > > That's the basic idea, yes. > > > >> But what about extensions that are symlinked to core? Will they need > >> to update their version info during core release cycles? > >> It obviously shouldn't have a -dev version when distributed with PHP.. > >> Is it up to the RM to hunt those extensions down and make sure the > >> version info is accurate? > > > > Just removing the "-dev" in the version number would be wrong (as is > > symlinking), a Stable PHP release should include "stable" extensions. > > Not dev versions of the extension. So one of the ideas is to fetch the > > last stable extension release for a PHP release, but well, then there's > > the problem that everybody (people using snaps, people using CVS, ...) > > end up with different versions which makes QA hard. (not to mention bug > > hunting trouble with people using the latest release but updated a > > single extension, ....) > > But we already have those problems now. Labelling the version just makes it > more obvious that we have those problems :) Exactly. So lets deal with one problem at a time Johannes. But Steph: Your RFC doesn't mention how to deal with the problem. During development the extension should be -dev... so who is responsible to change it back during PHP releases? -Hannes