PHP Pear packages as RPMs

[Steven Moix]

Hello all,

I'm new to this list (and new to RPM packaging in Fedora too), so I
packaged 2 php-pear libraries which are currently under review by C.
Stone. This made me think about the usefulness of packaging Pear
libraries as RPM files...

A library installation using Pear is usually as simple as running "pear
install xxx" so it makes me wonder if we are reinventing the wheel by
creating RPMs. After all, pear = yet another yum-like repository with
many common commands.

The simple answer is that we need RPMs to provide an autonomous Fedora
installation DVD. But what about Pear RPMs which are not a dependency of
other programs shipped with Fedora? Wouldn't it be a good idea to add
Pear as a PackageKit backend? Or is trusting Pear directly too risky?

Steven

[Remi Collet]

Steven Moix a écrit :
> Hello all,
>
> I'm new to this list (and new to RPM packaging in Fedora too), so I
> packaged 2 php-pear libraries which are currently under review by C.
> Stone. This made me think about the usefulness of packaging Pear
> libraries as RPM files...
>
> A library installation using Pear is usually as simple as running "pear
> install xxx" so it makes me wonder if we are reinventing the wheel by
> creating RPMs. After all, pear = yet another yum-like repository with
> many common commands.
>
> The simple answer is that we need RPMs to provide an autonomous Fedora
> installation DVD. But what about Pear RPMs which are not a dependency of
> other programs shipped with Fedora? Wouldn't it be a good idea to add
> Pear as a PackageKit backend? Or is trusting Pear directly too risky?

I'm rather asking me if we should not disable "pear install" feature ;)

Ok : not all the pear extensions available in RPM.

Using "pear install", you break your system coherency (file not owned by
any package)

Using RPM you :
- keep system coherency
- insure yourself the package have been tested on your distribution (at
least by the packager)
- have update notified by the package manager
- enable dependencies checking for web apps
    Requires; php-pear(Need_Extension)

The last is probably the most usefull.

Regards
> Steven
>
> Fedora-php-devel-list mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-php-devel-list

[Kae Verens]

Remi Collet wrote:
> Using RPM you :
> keep system coherency
> insure yourself the package have been tested on your distribution (at
>
> least by the packager)
> have update notified by the package manager
> enable dependencies checking for web apps
>   Requires; php-pear(Need_Extension)

also, you reduce complexity (and therefore also the tendency to break) 
by using just one package manager.

Kae

[Steven Moix]

On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 19:48 +0200, Remi Collet wrote:
> I'm rather asking me if we should not disable "pear install" feature ;)
>
> Ok : not all the pear extensions available in RPM.
>
> Using "pear install", you break your system coherency (file not owned by
> any package)

Ok, point made, this was what I meant to say with "Or is trusting Pear
directly too risky?". It was just an idea for the long, long, long
term :)

Steven