Re: Naming clash

Derick Rethans wrote:

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, Greg Beaver wrote:

There are several possibilities here. Because of the need for the -n switch when installing extensions from pecl, I was planning to add a new command "pecl" (oddly enough :) to handle this. It would mean adding a little magic into the pear installer (easy to do) so we would see:

Or just make it a shell script that calls "pear -n pecl $@" ... This was my plan, although I was going to do it with a wrapper script, as the internals of PEAR need to know:

peclcmd.php: <?php define('PECL_CALLED', 1); require_once 'pearcmd.php'; ?>

Note: there are some other interesting side effects. #1, all new releases would need to use package.xml 2.0. Fortunately, "pear convert" will automatically convert a package.xml 1.0 to package.xml 2.0, and then any changes can be done with simple editing. In addition, to maintain BC with older PEAR versions, packages would need to be packaged with both a package.xml 1.0 and 2.0, which is also very simple: "pear package package.xml package2.xml"

Not much of a problem either... perhaps "pear package" should figure automatically out if there is a package.xml and a package2.xml.

ah very nice, I'll add that too. There are some other issues that I am blogging about currently, I don't have all the solutions quite yet. http://greg.chiaraquartet.net/index.php/archives/2005/01/26/the-pecl-dilemma Greg