On Sun, 14 Nov 2004, Adam Conrad wrote:
> I don't want to sound like a "package baron" here, which is why I'm not
> CCing devel (I can do without the noise), though I am following up to
> the WNPP bug, as it's relevant.

There was no sign of progress on php5 packages so I prepared the packages
for myself. The final work was announced on devel.

> In a discussion I just had on IRC with the NM who's been helping me port
> the php4 packaging to php5, we (me, him, and some random bystanders,
> including someone who maintains a yada-based package) came to the
> general concensus that a package like PHP, which sees many NMUs and
> security updates is perhaps not a good choice to be packaged with yada.
> We all agreed that it can be a generally confusing system, and we'd
> prefer not to see it in PHP (especially if PHP goes on being maintained
> by a group).

The yada was used because it has very good handling of patches (they can
be safely unapplied) and macros so I think the package is much easier to
maintain and understand how it is working.

I would like to see PHP packages as alioth project maintained by a group,
so the group should choose the proper tool. Of course it shouldn't be an
absurd as pure dpkg tools. More important is the way of including changes
and this issue is not resolved with debhelper.

> Furthermore, while I realise it looks like I've been inactive on the
> php5 front, much of the work I've put into the php4 packages was to:
>
> a) serve as a proof-of-concept for php5 packaging.
> b) pave the way for peaceful coexistance of both packages.
>
> Chris Anderson has been working on porting the php4 packaging over to
> php5 and is due to hand his work off to me in a day or two, at which
> point I will be getting packages into Sid ASAP.  (I'm skipping
> experimental as these are all new packages, so an RC bug or two to hold
> them out of Sarge until they're ready is Good Enough).
>
> I notice that you've made some changes.  Some I agree with, some I don't
> (there's no need for a separate fcgi package, for instance.  If you look
> closely, you'll see that php4-cgi supports both "classic" CGI and
> FastCGI out of the box).  Perhaps you'd like to join the PHP team and
> discuss these in a team environment?

I would love to.

The FastCGI as separate package is not really important now. I'd like to
add the init.d script for php5-fcgi in future and then it could made a
sense.

More important is very lightwight php5 binaries without unnecessary
libraries. For busy site which doesn't utilise XML, SSL and DBM these
extensions should be stripped from main module.

> At this point, I'd like to ask you to hold off on uploading your
> packages.  Mostly due to the fact that if your packaging isn't what ends
> up in Sid, any users who did install your packages may not be provided
> with the smooth upgrade path they'd like.  At least if the come from an
> "unofficial" repository, they'll be prepared for that.

I don't want to upload any package without previous discusion.

Just now there are PHP5 packages available on packages.dotdeb.org and they
are more problematic as far as theirs maintainer is not Debian developer
and he made a lot of mistakes.

-- 
.''`.    Piotr Roszatycki, Netia SA
: :' :    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
`. `'     mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  `-

Reply via email to