RE: [PEAR-DEV] PEAR2 package naming standards (namespace usage)

Ok thanks Joshua. Your examples clarify a lot the RFC (to me), and I was quite out of the matter regarding the "SVN problem". Maybe I would advise to include these examples in the RFC. I also found this explanation quite enlightening: >The problem is that the PEAR1 setup overlaps files into the same >directory. You can can't use an svn external for an HTTP_Request and a >HTTP_Header package since they both have a file in the HTTP dir. >This RFC means all code for a package is in one base dir and there is no >overlap. I had been inventing very complex reasons for that "SVN problem", while it was just that. >In my opinion Arnaud and Greg's initial RFC wasn't enough. It largely >kept the PEAR1 pattern just replacing _ with ::. It also stated "A::B::C::D" (namespace) implies "A/B/C/D" (file layout), which is quite important. Travis's RFC does not remind that rule, and, at a moment, I thought it was replaced by some other obscure mixing recipe involving the underscore. But if you promise me that the class PEAR2::PHP_UML::XMI::Builder can be stored into PEAR2/PHP_UML/XMI/Builder.php, then I can sleep peacefully. Baptiste