On Sunday 05 July 2009 20:08:01 Roman Kyrylych wrote:

This sounds reasonable to me. PEAR classes could/should be packaged it is the case with perl/python/ruby/lua/etc. packages BTW I've never had to use PEAR in any of PHP projects I do at my job, I wonder how broad its usage among PHP developers is.

Most projects bundle their own copy of pear classes if they use them. I only used phpunit from pear. I just put a pkgbuild for it into AUR. Even the pear website itself recommonds to use pyrus instead of pear to install packages. -- Pierre Schmitz, http://users.archlinux.de/~pierre

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 12:42 AM, James Rayner wrote:

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 12:52 AM, Pierre Schmitz wrote:

...

Hi all,

I just wondered if we should just remove pear from our php package. Pear is a package manager for php and as such bypasses pacman. Using pear is not a great idea imho; you might have conflicts on php updates and files that are not tracked by pacman. (using -f might break things here)

People who still want to use pear instead of pacman could provide a PKGBUILD in AUR for this.

What do you think?

And btw: pear itself does not seem of "high quality"; did anyone try it with E_ALL|E_STRICT etc.?

Unless it's an issue, not building, or otherwise broken (ie a technical reason), I'd say leave it in. We've got easy_install for python, cpan for perl, etc.

It's up to the users to decide whether to use pacman or otherwise - not our responsiblility.

I think I agree with James here. What about the people who WANT to use PEAR? I know there are some people who prefer easy_install for python.

On Mon, 2009-07-06 at 16:07 -0500, Aaron Griffin wrote:

I think I agree with James here. What about the people who WANT to use PEAR? I know there are some people who prefer easy_install for python.

What about CPAN? That's still included in the perl package also, that's also a tool that installs perl software without pacman knowing about it. I maintain some debian machines with php on it, sometimes I need a pear module and just do "pear install <module I need>". I keep my pear installation up2date using the pear tool. The fact that apt-get overwrites them on every upgrade doesn't mean I don't use "pear upgrade-all" after that. IMHO a basic set of pear packages hould be included in the PHP package, the rest can be managed by either pear, or if the user really insists on it, pacman packages.