Re: Re: PECL != Siberia

OMG!!! Am I the only one who finds this a bit of a windows-esque way of doing things?? I can see orphan registries, unsatisfied dependencies etc... files floating all over the place.. I would really like to put forward the suggestion that pear should not be in the standard include path, but should be included with its own command pear_include or something. This command should then check that the requested module is in the registry, before including it.. The checks could be done at start up, to prevent overheads when using pear files. Sorry if this has already been discussed to death. I have RTFM and I would like to search the list archives but the list search doesn't work. At 09:52 13/06/2002 +0200, Martin Jansen wrote:

On Wed, 12 Jun 2002 18:41:33 +0100, Michael Dransfield wrote: so what happens now if I try to use a PEAR extension which has not been officially installed into the registry?? Will it still work ? Yes, they will also work, but you are strongly encouraged to install *every* code with one of the PEAR installers. Otherwise you'll have a harder time to uninstall or upgrade them. - Martin -- Martin Jansen, <mail@martin-jansen.de> http://www.martin-jansen.de/ -- PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php