On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 05:59:09 -0700 (PDT) "Jesus M. Castagnetto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bottomline, most discussions on what formats to support specifically > (apart from a source tarball), boils down to: If you want FOO to be > supported, write the code to support FOO. Even topline currently. As a summary and to confirm this possibility: >From a previous post (Tomas, Jon), pear package [-t <type>] [-b] [-s] <package> -t <type> The type of package you want to generate (pear, rpm, msi, etc) -b Specifies a binary package -d Only generate the description package file That may fit with most of the packages you would like to have. Then as Martin pointed this morning, the default package should be the current one: tgz. This is the only one that is really crossplatform and completely mananed by our scripts with php. Besides the optional archives formats (which are peanuts), there are a few questions we should solve quickly: - does the dtd for the package.xml is full featured for the pecl binaries needs? - do we agree on the filename format? - what are your requirements? from the phpdev """side"""? I mean what do you to see in the pear manager as well as during the release process? (signature, build system or who build what) Any chance to go one or two steps further quickly? hth pierre -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
