Re: make-packages.php

Speaking of the pear-CVS, i have one problem with it. As I understand it, all files belonging to one Package are in a directory with the Package-Name on the same Directory level and the actual directory structure for installing is described in package.xml. so, for the DB-Package, we would have /DB ->DB.php ->common.php ->oci8.php ->storage.php ->STATUS ->package.xml But i think, it would be better if we had the actual Dir-structure also in the CVS. /DB ->DB.php ->package.xml ->/DB ->common.php ->... Because now, when i check out a package from the cvs, i have to build the directory structure (if i don't use the pear installer), and then, if i want to check in, i have to copy the files back to the flat structure. Not very developer-friendly ;) if i had the dir-structure already in the cvs i could only point my include_path to that and it woulld work... and furthermore, with the actual scheme, it's not possible to have the same filename twice in different directories. I think, it's not a big problem, to make the installer to work with that scheme (it does not at the moment). The next problem is really not a big problem, just to avoid maybe some further clashes, when pear gets bigger... the syntax in the package.xml: <FileList> <Dir>/</Dir> <File>blabla.php</File> <File>blabla2.php</File> <Dir>/Next</Dir> <File>hello.php</File> </FileList> is in my point of view not very xml-like. It works maybe well with a parser like expat, but with a dom-thingie or xsl you would have big problems with that. Better would be <FileList> <Dir path="/"> <File>blabla.php</File> <File>blabla2.php</File> </Dir> <Dir path="/next"> <File>hello.php</File> </Dir> </FileList> or even <File name="hello.php"/>, but that's really a detail :) What do you think? is it already to late for changes like that? chregu On Yesterday, Stig Bakken wrote: > 1. we standardize the version tagging scheme (e.g. V_1_0_REL for the 1.0 > release) > > 2. use thecurrentstable and currentdevel fields in the packages table to > determine which tag to check out for each package. > > 3. add a parameter to make-packages that lets you choose whether to build > stable or devel release tarballs, and maybe even a a snapshot mode that > builds packages with the date as the version number, checking out the head > revisions. > > - Stig > On Sun, 8 Jul 2001, Martin Jansen wrote: > > > On Sun, 8 Jul 2001 16:52:38 +0200 (CEST), Stig Bakken wrote: > > > > >but will this script check out the > > >head revision of all files? what happened to release numbers? imho > > > this script should check out a specific tag in each package, for > > >example "STABLE". if the online packages are just head checkouts, > > >we have a disaster on our hands soon :) > > > > I must admit that I didn't think much about this topic ;-). > > Perhaps somebody has a good idea how to handle this? > > > > - Martin > > > > > > > -- nam...christian stocker adr...bremgartnerstr. 66, ch-8003 zurich pho...+41 1 451 6021 www...http://phant.ch/chregu mob...+41 76 561 8860 ema...chregu@phant.ch