Re: PEAR2 package naming standards (namespace usage)

Please do set me up in the pear2 repo, and I will start working on my proposal for the PEAR2 branch. One thing I've been annoyeed with concerning the naming is the Services_Shipping part, which I really want to be Services::Shipping, is this possible? I don't have any "fancy" name for my package, just that it's about shipping services :-/ I don't have a production server for 5.3 available, but I do have a local test bed. Cheers, Kristopher Ives On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 10:35 PM, Joshua Eichorn <josh@bluga.net> wrote: > I believe what you would end up with is: > pear2::services_shipping::XML > pear2::services_shipping_ups::Driver > pear2::services_shipping_dhl::Driver > > Though i don't have a great understanding of your setup so i can't quite be > sure what the best plan would be. > > PEAR2 svn is all one repo but you would have a different directory for each > subpackage so: > http://svn.pear.php.net/pear2/services_shipping/trunk/src/... > http://svn.pear.php.net/pear2/services_shipping_dhl/trunk/src > > But there is a default alias for ease of development that checks out all > the trunk branches for you and you can check things out in whatever pattern > you want so development wise we should be able to get a good solution. > Other then that its the same repo so you move files around etc while > keeping history. > > Travis should have more thoughts on what he would suggest as the names. > > Also i can get you setup in the pear2 sandbox if you'd like to start taking > a look at developing for php 5.3 and getting and idea of what namespaces > would mean to your code. Have more tests (and eyes) looking at the new > conventions is always a good thing. > > -josh > / > > > /Kristopher Ives wrote: > >> 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 >>> >>> >> >> >> > >