RE: [PEAR-DEV] RFC Nested Set manipulation class

Hello Lorenzo, > > Well as a said a container approach probably does not make sense fort > > his package, so I don't see a way around having two separate packages. > > But this is becoming a common problem. See QueryTool etc. > > Why not? I think that a container approach would really make sense... > Wolfram already started something in this direction, although some > work is still needed. [..] > On the other hand, I don't see the need for different packages here: > a container-driven class is possible IMO, and I think that a rewrite > would be quite easy. If current PEAR::Tree is going to be moved > to Structure::Tree (or whatever), this would be the perfect time > to consider some changes... Aren't we talking about 2 different things right now? The post with the two different packages was about having MDB support for NestedSet. That has in this case nothing to do with Tree. For Tree there is a discussion if a unified API for trees would make sense (I guess - yes). Best regards Daniel [datenPUNK] Khan