On Tue, 2002-01-22 at 22:17, Alex Black wrote:
> > Template classes are also foundation components of modern
> > applications.
> They are certainly important, but they do not prevent interoperability in
> the same way that different database abstraction packages do.
> >> application, using APIs that are slightly different is a bad thing.
> > 
> > Of course, but no one forces you to do that. I, as a developer,
> > can choose if I want to use PEAR::Metabase in my application
> > or PEAR::DB.
> Yes, which is not a good idea. If you're tying to get people to use a common
> set of high quality classes, you'll need to introduce some standards.
> > Remember, PEAR ist not Midgard. PEAR is no application framework.
> > It's a pool of classes that follow coding standards.
> As the project leader of binarycloud, which is an application framework that
> uses some limited amount of PEAR code, I am obviously aware of the
> difference. I have no interest in PEAR as an application framework, I like
> it as it is: pool of classes that follow coding standards.
> It has been repeated over, and over, and over again that PEAR is not CPAN.
> If PEAR will allow multiple versions of a foundation component like database
> abstraction, then PEAR certainly is CPAN, with coding standards added.
> CPAN is huge and tangled because its owners did not want to make decisions.
> PEAR can be that as well, though given the extremely limited CVS access to
> the repository it doesn't strike me as a CPAN clone, it strikes me as a
> concerted effort to come up with a set of base classes for common needs in
> the development community. Thus my argument for one abstraction layer. if
> you guys are building CPAN with coding standards, great, but say so. I and
> no doubt others will finally shut up about this question and we can all get
> on with writing code and designing stuff that works.
> This points to the age-old problem with PEAR: no one can decide what it
> actually is, so this argument comes up in different forms about once every
> three months.
> Just decide: is PEAR:
>     -CPAN with coding standards
>     -PHP Base Classes
> That's a big difference.

I'm currently writing "The PEAR Manifest", a document that clearly
defines PEAR once and for all.  I'll post the first draft on pear-dev
here when it's done, but to answer your question, there has been talk
about a "core" set of packages for a while.  In the manifest these are
called PFC (PHP Foundation Classes), although it will not say which
packages the PFC includes.  The manifest also covers PECL, and how PEAR
relates to applications and frameworks.

 - Stig

PHP Database Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to