RE: [PEAR-DEV] a case for subpackages

> I'm very against requiring PEAR CVS. phpDocumentor, for > example, had a > long history of using a different CVS repository before > becoming a PEAR > project. We have developers who have absolutely nothing to > do with PEAR > who help to develop it, and there is no good reason to throw > everything > off by requiring them all to get PHP cvs access and change > all of their > local repositories, not to mention the complete loss of any > commit history. That could be solved by moving the repository itself (just for the record, some people may find it useful). But you're right, a package should be able to exist outside pear CVS. > Patches contains absolutely no stability information, and > they also lose > all the benefits of the pear installer (replacements, install-as, > OS-specific install, different baseinstalldir). For these > reasons, it > would be less efficient for complex packages/applications > (the only ones > that would use the subpackage feature are complex, so there you go :). Arnaud.