Re: Re: Final RFC for Net_SMPP/Net_SMPP_Client

On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 14:58:09 -0700 ieure@php.net (Ian Eure) wrote: > On Tuesday 19 July 2005 02:18 pm, Pierre-Alain Joye wrote: > > http://pear.php.net/manual/en/standards.naming.php > > "The PEAR class hierarchy is also reflected in the class name, > > each level of the hierarchy separated with a single underscore." > > > > Can it be more clear? > > > Yes, it can. "PEAR hierarchy" is not defined, and it's not clear > if that means "the category/subcategory structure" or "absolutely > every file in a PEAR installation." > PEAR folder hierarchy, please do not with words :) > So you advocate making a project harder to use because it's > internal structure (which should never be used directly) doesn't > match the PEAR conventions? That seems like a pretty bad > trade-off to me. In what is it harder? > Can someone else please weigh in on this? I'd really like this > point resolved before I call for votes. I know it's unusual for > PEAR packages to have files with underscores in them, but I think > it's really the right thing to do in this case. It's not unknown > in PEAR, either: ... > Furthermore, I note that you are the lead developer of both > HTML_Template_IT and XML_XSLT_Wrapper. I fail to see how you can > argue that this is bad when I do it, yet perfectly fine when you > do. Both were there before we defined these rules. They are still like so for obvious BC reasons. --Pierre