zendframework package with or without bin package

Frank Habermann · External Since: Nov 15, 2006 Posts: 9

Hi folks,

i have created the package zendframework and zendframework-bin. The package
zendframework contains the php libraries. The bin package contains two
scripts with that you can create a mvc environment with the zendframework.
This is only important for developers.

So my question is, if i should also add the binary files to the zendframework
package or if i should leave them separate?

I also want to rename the package to libphp-zendframework.

regards,
Frank

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST.RemoveThis@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.RemoveThis@lists.debian.org

Raphael Geissert · External Since: Mar 11, 2009 Posts: 8

Frank Habermann wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> i have created the package zendframework and zendframework-bin. The
> package zendframework contains the php libraries. The bin package contains
> two scripts with that you can create a mvc environment with the
> zendframework. This is only important for developers.
>
> So my question is, if i should also add the binary files to the
> zendframework package or if i should leave them separate?

The general answer is whether it has any benefit or not (size could be an
example).

>
> I also want to rename the package to libphp-zendframework.
>

biased answer: ugh, why?
That reminds me some of the libfoo-bar-moo-invent-something-else-here
packages we have in the archive.

P.S. -mentors would have been a more appropriate list for this question.

Regards,
Raphael Geissert

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST.DeleteThis@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.DeleteThis@lists.debian.org

Jeremiah Foster · External Since: Jul 19, 2006 Posts: 30

On Sep 23, 2009, at 1:22, Raphael Geissert wrote:

> Frank Habermann wrote:
>>
>> I also want to rename the package to libphp-zendframework.
>>
>
> biased answer: ugh, why?
> That reminds me some of the libfoo-bar-moo-invent-something-else-here
> packages we have in the archive.

One possible answer to "why?" is that libfoo-bar-baz allows users easy
access to a debian package that directly corresponds to the upstream
software.

In the case of a perl package on CPAN it would be called Test::File.
In debian it would be called libtest-file-perl since the perl module
is a library, renamed test-file in accordance with debian policy and -
perl added to denote which programming language the package is written
in. This allows one to have libtest-file, libtest-file-ruby, etc,
without too many namespace collisions. Since a vast majority of debian
perl packages are named this way, users know what to look for on a
debian system simply by the upstream name.

Jeremiah

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST DeleteThis @lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster DeleteThis @lists.debian.org

Raphael Geissert · External Since: Mar 11, 2009 Posts: 8

sean finney wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 06:22:20PM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
>> >
>> > I also want to rename the package to libphp-zendframework.
>> >
>>
>> biased answer: ugh, why?
>> That reminds me some of the libfoo-bar-moo-invent-something-else-here
>> packages we have in the archive.
>
> the php policy draft recommends something along these lines as well,

I know, and it still mentions some php.ini munging IIRC.

> though in practice i think there are more php[N]-foo than there are
> libfoo-php[N]. while originally the intent was to seperate extensions and
> php libraries into two seperate naming conventions, it doesn't seem like
> this is realistic or worth the effort to try and police.

php<n>-foo has been being used for extensions
php-foo for pear modules (although there are a couple of non PEAR packages
using that naming IIRC)
libphp-foo and libfoo-php for libraries
and some weird combinations such as libfoo-php<n> (which I think are
extensions).

But frameworks are the exception: cakephp, horde3, and the odd case of
php5-symfony1.0.

Cheers,
Raphael Geissert

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST DeleteThis @lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster DeleteThis @lists.debian.org

Raphael Geissert · External Since: Mar 11, 2009 Posts: 8

Jeremiah Foster wrote:

>
> On Sep 23, 2009, at 1:22, Raphael Geissert wrote:
>
>> Frank Habermann wrote:
>>>
>>> I also want to rename the package to libphp-zendframework.
>>>
>>
>> biased answer: ugh, why?
>> That reminds me some of the libfoo-bar-moo-invent-something-else-here
>> packages we have in the archive.
>
> One possible answer to "why?" is that libfoo-bar-baz allows users easy
> access to a debian package that directly corresponds to the upstream
> software.

Yes, but the Zend Framework is "the" Zend Framework. Zend being the company
behind its development and behind the engine used in PHP it is somewhat
explicit and obvious.
The risk for a namespace collision in this case is minimal (if not zero),
and prefixing it with libphp- just makes the name uselessly longer. Not to
mention that it is a framework, not just a library.

Btw, some stats:
8089 packages with 0 dashes
10243 packages with 1 dashes
6068 packages with 2 dashes
1547 packages with 3 dashes
230 packages with 4 dashes
48 packages with 5 dashes
14 packages with 6 dashes
1 packages with 7 dashes

(sid/main/i386)

Cheers,
Raphael Geissert

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST.DeleteThis@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.DeleteThis@lists.debian.org