Re: [PEPr] +1 for RFC::Prefix all classes with PEAR_
| From: | Mark Wiesemann | Date: | Fri, 06 Oct 2006 19:33:08 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [PEPr] +1 for RFC::Prefix all classes with PEAR_ | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-44423@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Philippe Jausions schrieb:
Mark Wiesemann wrote:No, it's very much related to the prefixing. It has nothing to do with re-categorizing, but is an idea that could make the PEAR_ prefix more reasonable, especially because of the long package name that it could cause (think of PEAR_Spreadsheet_Excel_Writer [=> PEAR_Excel_Writer]). The packages should of stay in the same categories as now. Example: Structures_DataGrid could get for a new major release the name PEAR_DataGrid, but will stay in Structures category. Regards, MarkMark Wiesemann wrote:You are asking about re-categorizing the packages... this is unrelated to prefixing with PEAR_.Mark Wiesemann (http://pear.php.net/user/wiesemann) has voted +1 on the proposal for RFC::Prefix all classes with PEAR_.- allow to remove the category name from the package name (this is not in the RFC) The last point would allow us to name a new major version of Structures_DataGrid "PEAR_DataGrid" which is short and descriptive enough. Of course, some packages need to retain the category name, e.g. DB_Table, HTML_Table and Console_Table.