Re: Bundled PEAR packages

# mj@php.net / 2003-04-15 08:06:19 +0200: > On Mon Apr 14, 2003 at 10:5743PM +0200, Pierre-Alain Joye wrote: > > 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. this not only increases the WTF factor for users, it also does so for packagers. the FreeBSD port ("source package") of PHP has been in flux for some time now, the primary reason being a bit of difficulty separating CLI/CGI from mod_php4, and separating all of those from PEAR. ripping PEAR out from PHP tarballs completely would make it slightly easier to install PEAR base separately. > > > 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. I would even vote for moving stuff like pear.in, pearize.in etc. from php4/pear to pear/. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message. see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html