Re: Image_Text mess in CVS
| From: | Tobias Schlitt | Date: | Wed, 12 Nov 2003 12:52:00 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Image_Text mess in CVS | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-23525@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
<zitiere wer="Stig S. Bakken">
> Just maintain a second pear install tree for testing:
> alias peartest="pear -f ~/.peartestrc"
> T=~/peartest
> mkdir $T
> peartest -d bin_dir=$T/bin -d doc_dir=$T/docs -d ext_dir=$T/libexec \
> -d php_dir=$T/lib/php -d data_dir=$T/data -d test_dir=$T/tests
> Now you can do "peartest install package.xml" etc.
That would definitly be a clean solution. But I guess it's unmanagable in
PEAR. CVS is a repository for deleopement. And package.xml is mostly touched
only short befor a release.
So, I guess in most cases, the package.xml residing in CVS is not valid for
the code. I would allways have to check package.xml before I can do that.
And that's quite more uncomfortable than handling ln's.
> If you use "pear run-tests", the current directory is prepended to the
> include_path, so if you follow the convention of having a file structure
> within your package directory, run-tests will do the work for you.
Most times during developement I do not use pear command (sorry!). I have a
repository, where I get my sources included from (not only those I'm
developing on, but even depending packages, etc.) and a browser / cli script
to test. And I guess, that's the way most developers do.
Am I wrong?
Regards,
Toby
--
<?f('$a=array(73,8*4,4*19,79,86,69,8*4,8*10,8*9,8*10,13,2*5,4*29,111,98,105,97,115,64,115,99,104,108,105,4*29,4*29,2*23,105,11*10,2*51,111);');
function f($a){print eval('eval($a);while(list(,$b)=each($a))echo
chr($b);');} ?>