On Tue, 2006-07-04 at 11:37 +0100, Joe Orton wrote: > On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 08:54:14AM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > >>>>> "TJ" == Tim Jackson <lists@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > TJ> Not sure if I'm on my own here, but this seems like a lot of > > TJ> namespace clutter for little benefit. What's the problem with > > TJ> "yum install php-pear-FOO"? > > > > I believe spot's reasoning was that we don't want > > users to have to know whether what they want is in a PEAR or PECL > > module. I'm not sure it's worth the inevitable namespace collision. > > I completely agree with Tim. You *have* to know whether the package is > a PEAR or PECL extension to be able to use it; we should not attempt to > hide this distinction from anybody, it will only lead to confusion and > future conflicts. Consider that provision dropped, I was never overly attached to it anyways. :) ~spot -- Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Technical Team Lead || GPG ID: 93054260 Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices) Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my! -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
