Hello Helgi, obviously one problem is that PEAR does ignore coding standards. Classes should be prefixed in both pear and core. And neither Date nor File is in any way prefixed. In th end all we see here is that we want namespaces asap.
One thing to discuss now is whether we want to put out 5.1.1 or even 5.1.0pl1 asap with Date in ext/Date renamed to something diferent. best regards marcus Friday, November 25, 2005, 8:40:47 AM, you wrote: > On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 15:16:43 +0800, Alan Knowles wrote: >> This one's a bit more annoying than usual ;) >> >> It will basically break application that depends on the Date package >> (eg. most of my code as DataObjects uses it internally).. Do we really >> need another barrier to upgrade to 5.*? > Yeah indeed, now I'll have a heap of a time when my customers want to > upgrade to PHP 5.1, I find it a bit odd to have this kind of breakage ... > didn't we have similar situation with PEAR::File and the SPL::File ? Which > was later renamed to FileObject so both could happily live side by side ? > (or is my memory failing me) > IMHO this should be rolled back in .1 and only introduced in PHP 6 (on by > default) > Rasmus mentioned that no PEAR person tested the final RC and all that and > thus this issue wasn't found ... Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't that > change done between the final RC and the official release ? > Regards > Helgi Best regards, Marcus -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
