[pkg-php-pear] [Pkg-php-pecl] Extension (PECL?) naming scheme (Was: pkg-php-tools for 7.0 in master-7.0 branch and bootstrapping PEAR packaging)

[Daniel Beyer]

Hi,

a best possible start into the new year to you all.

On Thu, 2015-12-31 at 15:08 +0100, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> Hi David and all,
> 
> happy new year to you all!
> 
> On Thu, Dec 31, 2015, at 14:54, David Prévot wrote:
> > I like your earlier proposal (using “php-ext-” instead of “php5”), it
> > makes it clear we’re dealing with an extension rather than some (PEAR or
> > Composer) class. I’d go with that unless someone objects.
> 
> Fine with me.

Great.

> 
> Just one more thought, we could also go with:
> 
> pecl-<name>
> or
> php-pecl-<name>
> 

Following the Fedora naming scheme [1] it would be php-pecl-<name>. But
I don't see a benefit in having the distribution channel in the package
name. Fortunately enough in the Fedora naming scheme this is not done
for packages distributed through Composer.

> There are not much extensions that are not (also) hosted on PECL, right?
> I can think only of xcache (I am sure there are few more).
> 

Actually at least php5-twig and php5-symfony-debug can't be retrieved in
up to date versions over PECL (upstream abandoned their pear channels
mid 2014 [2]). From what I see it's the same for php5-pimple. In
nowadays (solely) Composer is used by upstream to distribute those.


Greetings
Daniel

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:PHP#Naming_scheme
[2] http://symfony.com/blog/end-of-pear-support-for-symfony
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-php-pear/attachments/20151231/8f3c869b/attachment-0001.sig>