Re: Re: my state of the pear address from a while back

Hoi, Lukas Smith wrote: > For these reasons, I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to simply start > over using our existing infrastructure? I recently proposed a new way > of organizing packages via "groups" that would make this technically > feasible. Unlike categories, these groups would be arbitrary, and would > only affect how packages are listed at pearweb and with these PEAR commands: > > I would add a "groups" table so that packages could be in more than 1 > group. Initial groups could be: > > - php5 (all php5+ packages in the repository > - php4 (all php4-compatible packages in the repository) > - siberia (all unmaintained packages) This could introduce the ability to maintain packages which have the same purpose but work in different versions of PHP like a PHP5 only version of a package which already exists as a PHP4/PHP% versions. Above said may IMO be of a high value for PHP6. There could also be a PHP5-strict group as PHP4 packages work in PHP5 but not with E_STRICT... And where is the proposal? -- mit freundlichen Grüßen | Jabber: m@tacker.org m.tacker | ICQ: 9170 9561

Attachment: [application/x-pkcs7-signature] S/MIME Cryptographic Signature smime.p7s