Re: [Phplib-users] Current PHPLIB development questions

[Chris J. <ch...@ch...>]

On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 01:46:20PM +1100, Richard Archer wrote:

> My preference would be for:
> 
> complete back-compatibility with existing applications
> good documentation for the changes outlining possible breakages
> not throwing warnings with all error/warning messages enabled
> compatible with the new PHP defaults wrt globals etc (done?)
> a switch in local.inc to choose phplib-session or session-4
> examples of session-4 classes in local.inc and the html dir
> 
> The main thing I would stress is that this release should not change
> the PHPLIB API in any non-compatible way. API changes may occur in the
> 8.0 release, but should not happen in an incremental release.
> 
> The only area where this may not be possible is in the session-4 stuff,
> but this is OK as long as the old phplib-sessions are still intact and
> back-compatible. Switching on session-4 for an existing app would be
> something the developer would do in a test environment (one hopes!).


> There is a devel tree (it's the one that's not stable :). Unfortunately
> this code is quite broken. It is really only useful as a resource for
> ideas (like the session-4 stuff). I would be hesitant to over-write
> this tree with a new suite of changes at this point.
> 
> I would like to see the rest of the good stuff merged from the "phplib"
> tree into the stable tree, and the old "phplib" tree deleted (or
> archived, whatever).
> 
> I think it would be quite a good idea to create a new branch for
> development work. I would like to see it called "unstable" and to
> include a file warning against inclusion of this tree for any
> packaged release of PHPLIB. This would be an attempt at preventing
> a repeat of the inclusion of the broken tree in several OS releases.
> 
>  ...R.

My thoughts exactly!  (Well, actually much more clearly stated than my
thoughts.)

I'm 100% in agreement with Richard.

It might make more sense to use the current "not stable" tree as a
source for ideas, as Richard suggested, rather than try to actually
merge everything or even most of what is in it into the stable version.
I think that would be a very large and risky undertaking.

-- 
    ..chris