Re: [PEPr] Changes in proposal for Configuration::Config_Lite

On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Patrick E. <zenobic@googlemail.com> wrote: >> I couldn't check it out - 404. > Oops, fixed. i have some trouble with my internet connection, because > i moved to another City and still haven't DSL, yet. Ok, checked it out. Anyway, I'd probably use @package_version@ etc.. But I have no preference. I ran the test suite, seems to work fine. Good job! >> Do you have a github repo or similar? > Yes, in October (when we have DSL), then i can open a repo . No worries, and no rush. :-) > >> [You'll need a replacement task in package.xml.] > thanks, i'll try that. > > -- > best Regards, > Patrick > > On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 2:02 PM, till <till@php.net> wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Patrick Engel <zenobic@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Patrick Engel (http://pear.php.net/user/pce) has edited the proposal for >>> Configuration::Config_Lite. >>> >>> Change comment: >>> >>> * updated the Config_Lite Package (used pear to create it), >>> * throws Exception, no dependencies, >>> * $ phpunit AllTests.php works, >>> * phpcs is still quite, >>> * package validated >>> >>> * to run the phpunit AllTests.php, i used a "if  Condition", >>>  like PHP_CodeSniffer. >> >> I couldn't check it out - 404. >> >> Do you have a github repo or similar? >> >> Btw, I'd avoid dirname() etc.. in Lite.php. If you want to test if >> you're running from a checkout or if you're installed through pear, >> check if @package_version@ was replaced. >> >> [You'll need a replacement task in package.xml.] >> >>>  Is it valid to test if it is installed, >>>  also in the Package's `Lite.php'? >>> >>>  Should we better throw an Exception that inherits  PEAR_Exception? >> >> Last time this came up, someone said it's fine to use Exception or >> SPL's exceptions. >> >> Cheers, >> Till >> > > -- > PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >