Well, comparitively speaking, to the whole of the PHP audience, there probably aren't that many people using the ext/mcve extension for PHP, but there are a few hundred, anyhow.
I'll look into PECL though to see if it is a suitable fit... -Brad Antony Dovgal wrote: > On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 16:34:44 -0400 > Brad House <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>Perhaps. There was discussion once upon a time along those lines, >>but nothing else came of it. I'd have to know what it entails, >>and if it would prohibit the extension from being distributed >>with the main PHP codebase. > > > AFAIK the general plan is to move almost all extensions to PECL > (and we're working on it, take a look on how many extensions were moved > there in 5.0 and 5.1), so users would be able to get & install only > extensions they really need. > > Personally I don't think that ext/mcve is used by large number of users > (I haven't ever heard of someone using it) and IMO that's a perfect reason > to move it from the core to PECL. > I can be wrong, though. > > There are also several rather important reasons to do so: > 1) you wouldn't depend on PHP release cycles. > 2) you would be able to use PECL infrastructure to build Win32 *.dll's > 3) Others. > > All this doesn't mean that users will not be able to install/use the > extension > or even have some problems with it. Extensions from PECL can be installed > with this command: > # pear install extname > See details here: http://www.php.net/manual/en/install.pecl.php > > >>Forgive my ignorance, but I have >>not even looked into what PECL really is. > > > Well, I'd recommend to take a look on it, since you're the maintainer of an > extension.. > -- PHP CVS Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
