On Apr 23, 4:06 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> <snip>
> <picky>The extension is not called SCA_SDO, it's just sdo.</picky>
> </snip>
> When I look at our package page [1] it's titled SCA_SDO although the
> loaded package and the cvs repository directory where our code lives
> still refer to it as sdo. So I think SCA_SDO is a valid name for it.
>
> [1]http://pecl.php.net/package/sca_sdo

Indeed the package is called SCA_SDO. But currently the extension is
sdo: either sdo.so or php_sdo.dll. My concern is that if we start
calling it the SCA_SDO extension, people will expect a SCA_SDO.so and
be confused. And it does also raise the questions of possible
migration of some SCA function to an extension in the future, and
whether SCA and SDO are a civil partnership or just good friends.


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"phpsoa" group.
To post to this group, send email to phpsoa@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/phpsoa?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to