Re: open questions about pear's REST interface to channels

Hi all, Does anyone have answers to my questions? > While writing the documents for the REST interface in peardoc, I > stumbled about some sections lacking clarity. Maybe someone could > help: > > - r/$package/stable.txt > - r/$package/beta.txt > - r/$package/alpha.txt > - r/$package/devel.txt > Do they exist if there is no stable/beta/alpha/devel version so that > the access to the file results in a 404? > > - r/$package/latest.txt > Does that list the most recently released version, or the highest > version? > We currently have a problem with Chiara_PEAR_Server: stable version is > 1.0.5, beta is 1.1.0b1. The stable version has been released *after* > the beta, which in turn has the higher version number. Which one > should be in latest.txt? The pear installer does not recognize the > beta and always wants to install the stable version unless forced in > combination with the direct version number. > > Does the file exist when there has been no release yet? > > > - m/allmaintainers.xml > The <h> tags - do they enclose the full name of a developer, or the > nickname only? It currently seems like the nickname. If that's the > case: Is the nickname lowercased? > > - m/${maintainernick}/info.xml > Same question as above > > - p/packages.xml > How are spaces in package names handled? Are they allowed? > > > - r/${packagename}/0.1.2.xml > <f> contains the file size in bytes. Is it the size of the tar or the > tgz? > It also has the maintainer handle in <m>. Which one is this? The one > who released it? All leads? > > > - r/${packagename}/deps.0.1.2.txt > Is the array format described somewhere? > -- Regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen Christian Weiske

Attachment: [application/pgp-signature] signature.asc