[Fedora-packaging] Re: PHP Guidelines update proposal

Axel Thimm Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Mon Jan 26 10:26:56 UTC 2009

On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 07:51:21PM +0100, Remi Collet wrote:
> What I was thinking (in an quite old discussion, during initial PHP
> Guidelines writing) is now reality
> According to PHP Guidelines, pear extension must be named
> 	php-pear-<extension>.
> That's ok for standard pear.php.net channel.
> With non standard channel we can encounter conflicts.
> llaumgui is working on submitting ezComponents for review.
> 	http://ezcomponents.org/
> For example, one of the extension is Mail and php-pear-Mail already exists.
> My proposal is :
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/PHP
> With this proposal, ezComponents will be named
> 	php-ezc-<extensionname>
> Comments ?
> Remi.

Is it possible/does it make sense to coinstall php-pear-Foo and
php-ezc-Foo or are they mutually exclusive?

Or rephrased, if another package requires Foo, can both serve up? If
this is the case then we probably need to think about solutions with
virtual dependencies.
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20090126/464e88bd/attachment.sig>

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list