Re: Pulling Net_LDAP 1.2.0

On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Chuck Burgess <demon.gene@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 7:24 AM, Chuck Burgess <demon.gene@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > The approved RFC that I found that covers this is at > > http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=65 > > > > Dug a little deeper... that RFC actually attempts to clarify a few points > regarding a PEAR Group directive on version naming that was published two > months earlier -- > http://pear.php.net/group/docs/20040226-vn.php > > That document looks to me like it is allowing Foo v2.0, rather than > requiring Foo2 instead... > And now I find the one that talks about Foo2 -- http://pear.php.net/group/docs/20031114-bbr.php It's older than the previous one, so the question becomes does the 2004-02-26 doc take precedence over the 2003-11-14 doc? Or do they complement each other? In the end, I go back to the RFC. It specifically shows that v2.0 of Foo must not only be a Foo-to-Foo2 change, but that the first stable of Foo2 must be 2.0.0 rather than 1.0.0. I suppose that in a world where Foo and Foo2 must co-exist, that was an attempt to avoid having things like Foo 1.0and Foo2 1.0 around. -- CRB