Re: PEAR DB copied to pear/

On 8 Feb 2002, Stig S. Bakken wrote: > On Thu, 2002-02-07 at 21:45, Edin Kadribasic wrote: > > > >I really don't understand what's the rush with moving everything to > > /pear, > > > >especially since the infrastructure is still not in place. The removal of > > > >Log class will cause many problems for me as well. Could someone provide > > an > > > >answer what's wrong with bundling the PEAR with PHP distribution? > > > > > > The problem with bundling the _whole_ PEAR stuff with the PHP > > > distribution is, that the distribution tarball will become very > > > big and people will have all sorts of different scripts on their > > > system they will possibly not need at all. > > > > How many glibc functions an average C program uses? Very few. > > > > I've repeated this several times, but here we go again: IMHO in order for > > PEAR to be universally accepted it must go standard class library way, not > > cpan way. Reason is simple. If I have to distribute my application that uses > > PEAR I don't want to write 10 page manual, "and then you download that class > > ... ". Instead I would like to be able to assume that if there is PHP on the > > machine there is PEAR as well. The alternative would be either writing my > > own version of the classes the avoid all the hassle or bundling them in the > > distribution. > > > > I've had very bad expiriences with cpan, and therefore would like PEAR to > > avoid them. After all many people claim that PHP stands for "people hate > > perl" :) > > I'm sorry, but the repeat timer for this discussion is still counting > down. Try again in two weeks. :-) :) That's why I keep posting from time to time in hope I can influence PEAR's direction a bit. Edin