Re: Re: package.xml: Should all deps for php <=4.2.0 be removed?

On 8 Mar 2004 at 18:30, Lukas Smith wrote: > Jan Schneider wrote: > > > Zitat von Klaus Guenther <klaus@capitalfocus.org>: > > > >> From: "Stefan Neufeind" <stefan@neufeind.net> > >> > >>> Since PEAR itself depends on php >= 4.2.0, do you think that we > >>> maybe should remove all deps for any php-version <= 4.2.0 since > >>> this is already implicitly done? imho this way we could try to > >>> keep the package-deps as low as possible (without any negative > >>> impact at all), which has always been a concern in the PEAR > >>> community. > >> > >> > >> Well, it seems to me that this particular dependency may be quite > >> useful to those poor souls who are forced to use php > 4.2.0. This > >> way they can see that a package can still be used when manually > >> installed. > > > > > > Beside that they can still use their old pre-1.3-pear to install > > this package. > > Every package should only depend on what it needs. You should not add > the dependencies of your dependencies to your dependencies (wow what a > sentence). > > Therefore if your package only depends on php 4.1.0 you should only > list > 4.1.0. If you depend on a recent PEAR version you will implicitly > have > the dependency and therefore there is no need to explicitly specify > it. However it may be nice to get some sort of full dep tree on the > package homepage. So should we demand to add a php-dep to every package because with the new PHP_Compat it can easily be determined which php a package needs? And in that case, should we even add deps to php <4.2.0? This or that way - I think we should decide if those deps are not necessary or should be demanded for every package. PS: Agreed that a full dep tree (and maybe a merged dep-list of all dependencies, including only the highest versions required) would be a good thing. Stefan