Re: Re: [PEPr] Comment on Logging::Log_Growl

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Laurent Laville<pear@laurent-laville.org> wrote: > Hello Christian, >> >> I like the growl integration for Log. What I don't understand is why you >> stick to php4, and why the class is named "Log_growl" and not >> "Log_Growl"? >> >> > > Why PHP4 ? Because all others handlers in standard PEAR::Log distribution > are still backward compatible. > > I know I made a PHP5 handler (Log_FirePHP) but it was on a period when > FirePHPCore itself was only PHP5+ > > And the reason why I named it  "Log_growl" and not "Log_Growl"  is behind > PEAR::Log code itself.  See : > >   function &factory($handler, $name = '', $ident = '', $conf = > array(), >                     $level = PEAR_LOG_DEBUG) >   { >       $handler = strtolower($handler); >       $class = 'Log_' . $handler; >       $classfile = 'Log/' . $handler . '.php'; > > Thanks to post the first comment ! > And BTW, woah what a job on package proposals list !!! You impressed me :) > > Laurent > Just out of curiosity will all PHP4 code fall apart with 5.3? I haven't ran any tests. But do we need to add max php versions to a lot of package.xml's? Till