Re: Re: cvs: pearweb /include pear-database.php
| From: | Lukas Smith | Date: | Wed, 27 Oct 2004 10:09:49 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: cvs: pearweb /include pear-database.php | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.pear.core php.pecl.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pecl-dev+get-1545@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Derick Rethans wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Greg Beaver wrote:Well the idea is that validation rules such as this should be handled as plugins and every channel can pick from the existing ones or writer their own. regards, LukasAnother *VERY* important reason this will be necessary is that the next version of the installer includes some rather strict validation rules for things like versioning, that will conflict with the way PECL works - PECL versioning appears to have no relation whatsoever to PEAR versioning, there are plenty of packages that are marked stable as version 0.2.0, and there are releases like 0.1.00 floating around too. If PECL has its own channel, it can use a much less strict validation mechanism, and can even prevent pear packages from being packaged as php releases (only extsrc/extbin would be allowed).But we should not have version numbers "0.1.00" or have "0.2.0" marked as "stable" it the first place. The versioning SHOULD resemble PEAR's (except for the perhaps package2 thing).