Re: PEAR2 package naming standards (namespace usage)

Hello all! I am a new PEAR developer, but I am very eager to adopt to the 5.3 release of PHP and move far away from any existing BC, such as PEAR1. I am proposing Services_Shipping, a driver-based shipping carrier framework. This includes Services_Shipping_XML, which is an abstract set of classes that isn't a driver, but a common set that XML drivers may use. Services_Shipping_UPS and Services_Shipping_DHL are examples of driver sub-packages. As I mentioned I am new to PEAR, but the above arrangement has caused the names of my classes to be very long. For example one of my class names is Services_Shipping_XML_ShipmentReceipt. From my understanding - this is required in PEAR that the Services_Shipping_XML must always be there, due to the lack of namespace/nesting. Under PEAR2 what would the pruposed layout of my packages be? Also, all of my projects are in one SVN repo. Cheers, Kristopher Ives On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 3:17 PM, Travis Swicegood <development@domain51.com>wrote: > Hey everyone; > > This summer the PEAR group has been busy making sure PEAR2's ducks are all > in a row for the impending PHP 5.3 release. The biggest change that we're > all going to get used to in this new version of PHP is namespaces. > > The quick way to migrate is to replace all _ with ::, shorten some class > names, but that ignores this very rare chance to really re-think the way we > do package names. The results of some back and forth between myself and the > rest of the PEAR Group and other members of the community is this RFC: > > http://wiki.pear.php.net/index.php/PEAR2_Naming_Standards > > Please review it and post your thoughts here for discussion. It is slated > for a vote @ the next PEAR Group meeting on September 14th, so now is your > opportunity to sway our opinion. > > -T