Hi, What I was thinking (in an quite old discussion) 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 not 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 : 1/ Channel package : php-channel-<channelalias> Virtual provides : php-channel(<channelname>) php-channel(<channelalias>) Ok for existing channels (phpunit, phping, ...) already in Fedora repository 2/ Extension package : php-<channelalias>-<extension> Virtual provides : php-pear([ <channelname>/ ] <extension>) So, for standard channel : php-pear-<extension> So we can use : Standard Channel: php-pear-Mail providing php-pear(Mail) = 1.1.14 Non standard Channel: php-ezc-Mail providing php-pear(components.ez.no/Mail) = 1.6 That means that a few packages "should" to be renamed, p.e. php-pear-PHPUnit => php-phpunit-PHPUnit (which is not really required still no conflicts exists) This packages already use the right virtual provides I will try to write this ASAP (for FPC/FESco approval) in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/PHP Comments ? Remi. P.S. another solution for ezcomponents is to build php-ezcomponents from global tarball without using the pear mecanism (but I really dislike this solution) _______________________________________________ Fedora-php-devel-list mailing list Fedora-php-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-php-devel-list
