On Mon, 2004-02-02 at 14:46, Gabor Hojtsy wrote:
> > We should change that to be of something more meaning full, maybe even
> > with a link to the matching PECL/PEAR entry rather then leaving the user
> > in doubt if he/she can actually make use of the function in his/her
> > environment.
> Steps we need to take to better handle PECL extensions:
>
> - Move PECL extension docs from peardoc to PHPdoc (split as needed)
This might be a bit of a problem as some extensions where moved to PECL
but previously where part of the core. This might be a bit of a
confusion for the user... Telling a user he has to install this
extension from PECL even though for his version of PHP its still shiped
within the default distribution might be even more confusing...
> - Hartmut's function list script collection should be extended
> to handle PECL extensions and PECL version numbers, since this
> script collection generates the version information you have
> problems with. The most complicated part will probably be
> the handling of bundled extensions, since corresponding PECL
> / PHP version numbers need to be known...
Is that really an issue? I can see the point in knowing the version
which came with the a php release, but for a function itself, the only
important information is the version of the extension. Since a
PECL-Extension can be updated regardless if there used to be a bundled
one, i don't see that as a really big problem. It's rather a nice to
know thing imho.
Regards,
Arne
--
Arne Blankerts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
