From the Jan E. perspective, one convention is big advantage, because
he maintains very useful packaged actual builds for tons of extensions
across different php branches.
- http://www.apachelounge.com/viewtopic.php?t=6123
It doesn't matter if the convetion will be based on special branch or
compatibility layer. But one conventions is surely better. But I think
it's impossible to archive this goal in most of exts in pecl and
certainly impossible for non pecl exts.
Miroslav Kubelik
On 19.11.2014 12:00, Jakub Zelenka wrote:
Hi,
BTW: if all extension maintainers use the same naming convention ('phpng
branch') it would make things somewhat easier.
I don't think that all maintainers will need two branches for that. At
least I don't want to have two branches and maintain the extension twice
:). For that reason I started working on the compatibility header that will
allow me to use the same code for 7 and 5. It's still very basic but it
already works with long, string and hash + some zval operations (accessors
mainly). You can see it on https://github.com/bukka/phpc/blob/master/phpc.h
. You can also see some examples on
https://github.com/bukka/php-extest/blob/master/extest_compat.c . As I said
it's just a start and there are still lots of issues and things that need
to be done but I believe that it's doable.
Of course it's not for everyone as some people won't like such macro
wrapper and some extension might be too complex for that. However there
will be extension that will be compilable for both versions so such
convention doesn't sound too good to me.
Cheers
Jakub
--
PECL development discussion Mailing List (http://pecl.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
