Re: new pear revert command

On 26 Aug 2003 at 22:00, Greg Beaver wrote: > 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. Why do you need two times PEAR? Could this possibly be left away when you are installting from a file / URL? I see: pear revert PEAR 1.2.1 makes sense. But would a pear revert PEAR-1.2.1.tgz be sufficient since from the package.xml you can digest that this package replaces the current package PEAR? One more funny thing: What if in: pear revert PEAR PEAR-1.2.1.tgz I issue a pear revert HTML_QuickForm PEAR-1.2.1.tgz ? Would it then uninstall QuickForm and try to downgrade PEAR (which should fail)? > Of course, in this specific example it would also eliminate the revert > command :). Why? Without the revert-command you are save that you don't downgrade to a previous version. Or did I get something wrong? Stefan