Re: Bundled PEAR packages

On Mon Apr 14, 2003 at 10:5743PM +0200, Pierre-Alain Joye wrote: > On Mon, 14 Apr 2003 18:47:49 +0200 > Martin Jansen <mj@php.net> wrote: > > > I suggest that we only bundle packages with PHP when we *really* need > > them. Thus there is really no reason to bundle phpUnit until we have a > > testing framework. > > I do not agree here, from the early 1st version of go-pear *and* > PEAR packages that are not required for the packages management > has been provided. Most of us agree that this was a historical mistake and that this common practice shouldn't be continued: The reason that we stopped bundling PEAR packages with PHP was that PHP became to bloated. Right now we are bloating it again by bundling more and more un-necessary packages again. > I proposed to bundle phpUnit too, many packages already use it or plan > to use it. Providing phpUnit in the "core" package put it as a > "standard" solution to create unit cases, this is a good thing. I still don't buy this argument: There is no automated test environment during the installation and *nobody* has ever publicly announced that his package makes full usage of Unit tests. Thus I don't see a point in bundling phpUnit at this point. This will give users the impression that the bundled packages (Net_SMTP, phpUnit) are part of the "PEAR core", which we don't have yet. This increases the WTF factor enourmously. > > Once we have found a solid base for PFC, this may of course change. > > Indeed, but unit cases are not only needed by the eventual PFC packages. Right. What I meant to say was that we should start bundling new packages with PHP, when they are part of the PFC. And that definitively isn't the case for phpUnit et.al. at the moment. Thus I still think the best solution is to remove at least (!) phpUnit from PHP snapshots. -- - Martin Martin Jansen http://martinjansen.com/