Am Dienstag 25 Januar 2011, 17:51:00 schrieb Richard Bos:
Hi Ralf,
from server:php:applications to a new sub project server:php:applications:pear ?
I created some of them for the groupware server Kolab (http://kolab.org). It is okay with me, if they'll be put in their own repository. Some questions thoughts; What does that mean for the maintainers? Sometimes one need to have access to both pear and php packages as sometimes a PHP package is a dependency for pear packages. It will therefore more difficult to add packages as an additional needs to be configured on the client (user) system. Is the latter acceptable (desired, etc)?
If we talk about the packaging process, this might be an issue but can be configured in the OBS GUI. If we talk about end users, shouldn't we aim to get pear packages into factory anyway? Currently, I need to include both server:php:extensions and server:php:applications even if I want to run php software from tarballs but want to have a clean (rpm-based) pear/pecl. That wouldn't change if it was s:p:a:pear. Applications would be yet another repo but I find that acceptable. Would you search for a bunch of common libraries in something called application? I'm not sure, that's why I asked. -- Ralf Lang Linux Consultant / Developer B1 Systems GmbH Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org