[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: PHP application packaging policy/best practice?

[No Cc needed, as per list policy]

On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 11:47:42PM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > it's _quite_ true that you don't need to play with include_path.
> > your library has to know it's installed
> > into /usr/share/php/<app-or-library-name> and either :
> >  * use some __FILE__ magic in its requires/includes
> >  * already use requires on <app-or-library-name>/*php files
> >
> > And I assume a lots of intern libraries are do not know how to do
> > that. even some that ARE packaged into
> > /usr/share/php/<app-or-library-name>
> what a mess.
> new try :
> It's only half-true that putting a lib into /usr/share/php/<libname> is 
> fine. the lib has to be able to manage such a thing, and it's a 
> requirement for a lib put into /usr/share/php/<libname> to be able to 
> live there, without having to change anything in the include_path
> what I meant is that :
> libfile1.php live in /usr/share/php/mylib
> if libfile2.php has a :
> require 'libfile1.php'; anywhere, then it's not valid to package that 
> lib in /usr/share/php/mylib, because libfile2.php 
> NEEDS /usr/share/php/mylib to be in the include_path.

So you patch libfile2.php to require_once 'mylib/libfile1.php' instead of
just 'libfile1.php'.  We've learnt to do this with C include files, why
can't people work out the same thing for PHP?  It's probably because of
PHP's history as an easy, quick-hack language, that a lot of people with
very little idea of even the basics of writing software have made an awful
lot of really bad decisions...

> I hope this was more understandable that the previous post

It is a bit easier, so I've replied to this one instead of your first.

- Matt

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: