Re: XML_Tree - Lets Fix this up finally

On 2/16/2005 6:58 AM, Davey spake the following words:

Justin Patrin wrote:

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 20:53:35 -0500, Davey <davey@php.net> wrote:

I think that the best solution is to release a 2.0.0 stable and fuck those who were relying on the bad implementation... but thats mean.

XML_Tree 2.0.0 does not confirm to the naming standards. For a new major version the package should be renamed to XML_Tree2. Release a BC breaking XML_Tree 2.0.0 would break many peoples' packages as "pear upgrade" would upgrade it to the new BC breaking version. I would suggest pulling the XML_Tree 2.0.0 RC(s) and release a new XML_Tree2 2.0.0.

This isn't an option. the 2.0.0 version was the latest release when I got a hold of the package, and has been the version since September 2003. My intention was to take the 2.0.0 version to stable. I'm not entirely sure why this version change occured, only Thomas can answer that. Now you see the difficulty? By removing the 2.0.0 branch anyone with this installed is screwed.

I've got a similar problem with HTML_Page/HTML_Page2. I ended up moving to HTML_Page2, but applying bugfixes, etc. to sub-stable HTML_Page 2.0.0. Or at least that's how I'm planning on doing it. Just so people can't complain. Now I'm planning on taking HTML_Page2 stable, but it may take a few weeks, as I currently am up to my neck in work. At any rate, it's a problem that the QA team probably should address in an RFC, but not making the RFC a policy, just a suggested plan of action. Klaus