cc'ing Tim since we had lots of discussion about much of this stuff
already and I'm not sure if he's on fedora-packaging (I didn't even know
that list existed...)
I was planning to add a "php-abi = <PHP_API_VERSION>" definition for C
ABI versioning rather than php(ABI).
Versioning language features in PHP a la MODULE_COMPAT_* is just not
going to be feasible; the language is not well-defined enough nor stable
enough for us to try and enforce versioning; plus stuff like
"zend.ze1_compatibility_mode" means the exposed language is dependent on
config options anyway.
I don't see why it's necessary for a PEAR package to require
php-pear(PEAR); that is somewhat equivalent to an RPM having "Requires:
rpm"; it should be sufficient and correct for PEAR packages to simply
"Requires: php-pear" AFAICS.
Why should a PEAR package for foo provide php-foo? Not sure that's a
On "Other Packages": an application written in PHP or such like should
not have a php- prefix at all. A Smarty package should be called
"smarty" (following the "upper-case is evil" rule of packaging).