Re: XML_RPC

Helgi Þormar wrote:

On Sun, 2005-02-27 at 01:31, Daniel Convissor wrote:

Hi Helgi: On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 01:28:21AM +0000, Helgi ?ormar wrote:

On Sun, 2005-02-27 at 01:15, Daniel Convissor wrote:

     
The <pearinstaller>?  That's there because package2.xml will only work with PEAR 1.4.x.
       

Well you don't have to place a dep on 1.4.0, optional might be okey.

As you can see from the tag, it's a dependency on the _installer_, not PEAR itself and it's for package2.xml only. To use the package2.xml features, one MUST have 1.4.0. It's not optional.

yeah, but since you can use 1.3.x also it's kinda misleading, but well you seem to have gotten what I meant here below

Ah, you're probably talking about the package page on pearweb. Let's take a look... http://pear.php.net/package/XML_RPC/download/. Ugh, a 1.4.0a1 "dependency." That's misleading. I'll contact Greg about it. By the way, I'm just doing what Greg told me to do. :)

Sure, just found it better to talk straight to you since you can pull not him ;-) But of course a pull isn't needed, the problem is that we only store 1 package.xml per release and seems we store the v2 in the database, if we want to show those things for both v1 and v2 we'd either have to place No, we just need to refine the dependency calculation on pearweb, that's all. The getDeps() command returns a dependency on PEAR, which I can delete by simply comparing the result of getDeps(true) to getDeps(). Unfortunately, this would require a new release to work, but if you open a bug on pearweb, I can try to fix it soon. All I have to do is do a check on upload to see if a package.xml exists in the archive, and if it does, we can do the thing that Helgi says below.

"This package is also installable via 1.3.x pear even tho it's not listed in the deps" or something :/ It's never painless to keep BC really :( Anyway we have to throw those ideas around, we might want to bring the webmaster list into the discussion, no ? - Helgi