Re: PEAR2 package naming standards (namespace usage)

From: Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 16:49:34 +0000
Subject: Re: PEAR2 package naming standards (namespace usage)
References: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  Groups: php.pear.dev 
Request: Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-50697@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
On Sep 1, 2008, at 9:42 AM, Paul M Jones wrote:
Propel, Phing, Creole ... I think those follow the PEAR1 class-to-file naming convention as well.
I think Travis's point (and mine as well since Travis and I chatted at length about this) is that we shouldn't be so narrowly focused on the past when it comes to PEAR2. PHP 5.3+ has a lot of goodies that we could have only dreamed about when PEAR1's conventions were largely set in stone. With that backdrop I think it's perfectly reasonable to rethink everything and anything. I don't think the focus with regards to PEAR2 should be, "Well, this is how we did it in PEAR1." I haven't read through all of this thread yet, but wanted to chime in with this point before I dove in headfirst. I'm sure there are fine technical points on both sides of the arguments as I highly respect all of the developers involved, but I wanted to make this point before I donned the flame retardant suit. :) Regards, --Joe

« previous php.pear.dev (#50697) next »