Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:15571 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 43497 invoked by uid 1010); 24 Mar 2005 11:18:34 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 43482 invoked by uid 1007); 24 Mar 2005 11:18:34 -0000 Message-ID: <20050324111834.43481.qmail@lists.php.net> To: internals@lists.php.net Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 06:16:03 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20050321201142.37642.qmail@lists.php.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20050323173319.02eb3990@localhost> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20050323173319.02eb3990@localhost> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.90.1.1 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig05629EE35B8AEAF197E7DB44" X-Posted-By: 24.172.149.58 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] extension naming From: jason.barnett@telesuite.com (Jason Barnett) --------------enig05629EE35B8AEAF197E7DB44 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ... >> The obvious problem is: >> What comes after "i"? ii? iii? iv? >> How transparent is this naming scheme to the user? Well if it's a simple Roman Numeral system like what I've just done then we wouldn't really have an issue (except that it assumes people know Roman Numerals). Not sure if that's really the way you all want to go though. The nice thing about doing it this way: It's a distinctly different numbering system and it just-so-happens to fit in with what we already have. Besides I thought one of the P's in PHP was "pragmatic". >> >> We had to address a similar problem in PEAR and we currently have the >> following regulation in place which is a solution which is not >> beautiful either: >> http://pear.php.net/group/docs/20031114-bbr.php Yeah that does have a few pock marks :-/ As another alternative you could just make it really, really obvious that the newest version breaks BC by just shoving BC in there. xmlrpcbc1 xmlrpcbc1.x.y xmlrpcbc2 ... -- Teach a man to fish... NEW? | http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html STFA | http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=php-general&w=2 STFM | http://php.net/manual/en/index.php STFW | http://www.google.com/search?q=php LAZY | http://mycroft.mozdev.org/download.html?name=PHP&submitform=Find+search+plugins --------------enig05629EE35B8AEAF197E7DB44 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (Cygwin) iD8DBQFCQqF4GK7BL3TShWoRAqvGAJ9vfmOfnq72EABng0YV66iYW98zcACfdxBI a9jm7t37Cw34rUqzJfbPiKg= =5Rzn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig05629EE35B8AEAF197E7DB44--