[PHP-DEV] Re: Moving extensions to PECL

2002-01-02 Thread Yasuo Ohgaki
Jon Parise wrote: I think the following standard extensions should be moved to PECL: ext/cybercash ext/icap ext/pfpro ext/yaz This is definitely not an inclusive list; it's just a start. I can't imagine a lot of people using these modules, so they seem like good

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Moving extensions to PECL

2002-01-01 Thread Marcel Beerta
Are there any well-founded objections to this (either in practice or principle)? no objections, but one thing that should be considered is what happens to the documentation for these extensions when they are no longer a part of the core distribution. Documentation should really be an

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Moving extensions to PECL

2002-01-01 Thread Martin Jansen
On 31 Dec 2001 19:18:59 -, Jim Winstead wrote: Jon Parise [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are there any well-founded objections to this (either in practice or principle)? no objections, but one thing that should be considered is what happens to the documentation for these extensions The

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Moving extensions to PECL

2002-01-01 Thread Jim Winstead
On Tue, Jan 01, 2002 at 04:05:18PM +0100, Martin Jansen wrote: On 31 Dec 2001 19:18:59 -, Jim Winstead wrote: Jon Parise [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are there any well-founded objections to this (either in practice or principle)? no objections, but one thing that should be considered is

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Moving extensions to PECL

2002-01-01 Thread Martin Jansen
On Tue, 1 Jan 2002 10:09:51 -0800, Jim Winstead wrote: i was thinking more along the lines of something that allowed the documentation for an extension to be managed on its own, Documentation somewhere is better than documentation nowhere ;-). Anyways, I don't have a really strong opinion

[PHP-DEV] Re: Moving extensions to PECL

2001-12-31 Thread Jim Winstead
Jon Parise [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are there any well-founded objections to this (either in practice or principle)? no objections, but one thing that should be considered is what happens to the documentation for these extensions when they are no longer a part of the core distribution. (and i

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Moving extensions to PECL

2001-12-31 Thread Alexander Wagner
Jim Winstead wrote: no objections, but one thing that should be considered is what happens to the documentation for these extensions when they are no longer a part of the core distribution. QA too. I suppose removing some of these less frequently used extensions will also help make the QA

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Moving extensions to PECL

2001-12-31 Thread James Moore
Jim Winstead wrote: no objections, but one thing that should be considered is what happens to the documentation for these extensions when they are no longer a part of the core distribution. QA too. I suppose removing some of these less frequently used extensions will also help

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Moving extensions to PECL

2001-12-31 Thread Jim Winstead
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 08:12:25PM -, James Moore wrote: The QA Teams job needs to be made as easy as possible, at the moment those people still working activly on QA a lot have a very hard time balancing time between testing for new bugs, localising and fixing bugs as well as making sure

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Moving extensions to PECL

2001-12-31 Thread Pierre-Alain Joye
look at the current situation with the mnogosearch extension -- 4.1.0 and 4.1.1 don't support the latest mnogosearch api. it will probably be at least three months before a distribution of php that does is released. if mnogosearch were a part of PECL, a new version could be released and

[PHP-DEV] Re: Moving extensions to PECL

2001-12-31 Thread August Zajonc
In conjunction with this, increasing the findability of the PECL might be a good idea. At the least an explict search at php.net either in documentation or whole site should result in at least one hit other than a changelog entry. - AZ - Original Message - From: Jon Parise [EMAIL