Re: File_DNS Changes

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 11:31 AM, till <till@php.net> wrote: > > > 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. > Planning to do this. > > 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. > It is currently marked as unmaintained and I requested to be the maintainer. I got back, submit some changes, show us what you can do, and we'll hand over the keys. > > >> 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 >