Re: Re: Net_SmartIRC first package.xml

> > Shouldn't this file be named SmartIRC.php to conform with PEAR standards > (without the .inc). > I didn't find any standards reated to the filename, same with directory stucture inside my package... > > Also, imho it is wise to first let a package reside on cvs for a while, > before actually packaging it, so that you'll be able to do quick bug > fixes/code changes without having to re-release a new package each time. > You might want to change the license before commiting to cvs (you agreed > to change to LGPL or PHP right?). > I agree with CVS, but I don't have the account yet. I can't do anything at the moment, so I am getting everything packed up with PEAR changes... Yes I agreed, the License will be changed to LGPL. > I'm thinking, what's the policy on include files? As your > defines.inc.php does nothing but define constants, why a include file at > all, why not just put them in the main file. As I remember, the DB > package also has quite a bit of constants, and they are all defined in > the DB.php file. Having a long constant declaration list in your main > file isn't bad thing imho. > It was in the main file, but if you work with that file and scroll the most of the time, then you will start making your code structure more clearly and easier to develop. Before it was really pain... > Are the benchmark*() methods really needed in your class, because they > have little to do with the whole IRC thing. > Those benchmark stuff I will seperate it out to its own file... (only including when actualy the benchmark is used) I use those benchmark things for optimizing code and ppl using that class, too. > You might want to change you method naming some more, to conform with > the PEAR coding standards > (http://pear.php.net/manual/en/standards.naming.php). Functions and > methods should have 'studly caps'. So, for example, setlogfile() would > become setLogfile(), and senddelay() sendDelay(). > Yes this is the next step I will do, rename all methods to PEAR style > > Otherwise, this could make for a very useful class in PEAR. > I thought that :) > Oh, yeah, I'm in favor of a release as NET_IRC 2.0. > This I don't like because the original project name would be lost and my version number is 0.4.0 currently, that I want to keep. > cheers, > > Stijn de Reede > Mirco Bauer aka MEEBEY -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GIT d s-: a--- C++ UL++>++++ P L++$>+++$ E W+++$ N o? K- w++>! O- M- V? PS PE+ Y- PGP>++ t 5+ X++ R tv+ b+ DI? D+ G>++ e h! r>++ y? ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------