Re: [PEPr] Call for votes on PEAR::PEAR_PackageUpdate

bertrand Gugger wrote:

Then I'm definitively too late. Your example of Benchmark is bad choosed, as Benchmark should in any case never add overload to the tested script. I still have in projects some Benchmark doing a minimum through sockets. Sorry, but imho no production stuff can do such auto update.

Why? Don't you have any applications that check for updates and let you know when a new version is available (Thunderbird)? Maybe my example of Benchmark was not the best, but PEAR_PackageUpdate would definitely be a nice fit for PEAR_Frontend_XXX. When you run PEAR_Frontend_XXX PEAR_PackageUpdate_XXX could be used to make sure that you have the latest version. The uses of PEAR_PackageUpdate are not limited to other PEAR packages. Just like any PEAR package it can be included in any PHP application. If you've ever had to support multiple versions of software I think you will appreciate the ability to keep all of your users as up to date as possible without heavy user interaction.

Some sketches would be better: * just issue a notice for people really wanting a production script "on the edge"

This requires the user to manually update the package. Which, if the user ever does update, can lead to confusion and errors. An automated process is more likely to be run and less likely to cause problems down the road. Plus error messages should not be displayed in production code.

* make a Net_Monitor_Service sub-class which would detect some upgrade

You don't need a monitor. You just need to make two calls to the packages channel server. One to check for updates the other to do the update if needed. PEAR_PackageUpdate is light and easy yet powerful and flexible. -- Scott Mattocks Author of the soon to be published: Pro PHP-GTK http://www.crisscott.com