Re: Modular distributions
Hi Lester,
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Lester Caine <[email protected]> wrote:
> The main focus here though is to more easily allow 'development' versions
> of extension improvements to be used in the field, rather than having a
> fully bundled update? In the past maintaining the windows installations has
> been by just updating a single extension, and formalising that still makes
> sense to me although I know that many of you prefer the 'core bundle' model
> which includes many packages that never actually get used by some of us. A
> modular model is used by the Linux distributions and seems to be preferred
> anyway?
I like the idea overall.
We may have php-src/ext/ as standard module that distributors must
compile statically (or should be loaded by default) and
php-src/bundled-ext/
as optional modules that may be loaded optionally.
We may include well maintained/mature PECL modules php-src/bundled-ext/
and bundled/ext may have it's own web pages for newer releases.
However, I also like the current way of distributing module as PHP package,
since I can assume capability of modules by PHP version and all I have to do
is PHP version check rather than each modules version check. It may be time
to forget about this, though.
Current way is reasonable to avoid dependency hell that other languages
have.
Convenience depends on users' usage. IMO.
Regards,
--
Yasuo Ohgaki
[email protected]
Thread (2 messages)