Re: new pear revert command

"Greg Beaver" <greg@chiaraquartet.net> a écrit dans le message de news:20030827020001.5624.qmail@pb1.pair.com... > Hi, > > I have a working pear revert command here at home, I won't post the > patch because I'd like to work out some code dealing with subpackages > first, but I wanted to get some feedback on the choices I made for the > command format. > > The way it works now is this: > > pear revert [--subpackages] packagename version number|packagefile > > packagefile can be any local .tgz, package.xml, or a URL > http://www.example.com/Package-1.3.tgz. > > This command is extremely useful for testing a release, and quickly > reverting to a known working release. > > For instance, if PEAR is being tested, you can download the .tgz for the > current version of PEAR, and then if something breaks for you, you can > simply: > > pear revert PEAR PEAR-1.2.1.tgz > > and voila - your installation is fixed. > > Of course, in this specific example it would also eliminate the revert > command :). > > Most situations would be if a user upgrades to a new version 3.3 of say > HTML_QuickForm. If suddenly things break, the user can do this while a > solution is being worked out to quickly keep code from being broken on a > live site: > > pear revert HTML_QuickForm 3.2 > > This will attempt to download version 3.2 of HTML_QuickForm from > pear.php.net (or the current master server), and then uninstall the > existing version and re-install. Dependencies are ignored with --nodeps > and --force, as in this case, it would probably be impossible to > uninstall without an error. > > It currently doesn't have the possibility of reverting required > dependencies, but I can add in --allreqdeps and --alldeps to complement > the new options for install, and they would work. > > The --subpackages option would also revert any installed subpackages > that depend on the current version to an earlier version that is > compatible with the older main package version, or uninstall them. It > would not install any new subpackages. I haven't implemented this yet. > > Any comments? Do you ever sleep? Very nice! > > Greg