Re: File_DNS Changes

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 7:58 PM, Jonathan Creasy <jc@box.com> wrote: > I'm working on some enhancements to File_DNS and this is the first PEAR > development I have done. I read through the style guides and best practices > but I didn't see an answer to my question. > > The DNS classes we use internally are structured more like the Net_DNS > package, we have classes for the resource records (Net_DNS_RR_A for > example). The parser in File_DNS was superior to ours but was missing a few > things we wanted and lacking a maintainer I decided to fork and work on the > enhancements to contribute back. > Sounds great! > > I have considered using the Net_DNS_RR_A classes within File_DNS or > creating similar classes as File_DNS_RR_A. > > I assume it is more preferred to reuse the Net_DNS_RR_A class correct? > Since File_DNS is still young, there's an opportunity for you to move the codebase to PHP5. And this also allows you to use Net_DNS2. I just marked Net_DNS deprecated on the website to point people to Net_DNS2: http://pear.php.net/package/Net_DNS/ [I hope no one minds. ;-) ] Anyway – back to your question: if possible, I'd leverage what Net_DNS2 has to offer as much as possible. In the end add Net_DNS2 as a dependency to the package.xml so people get all required packages when they install File_DNS. If you have changes/additions, you could also talk to the maintainer and see what he thinks. > If possible, I'd like to avoid the question [...] ;-) In the end, just create a bug report for File_DNS, attach your patches and nudge as again so in case the maintainer is not available the QA team can pick it up and review! HTH, Till