Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:29175 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 67590 invoked by uid 1010); 4 May 2007 17:42:55 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 67575 invoked from network); 4 May 2007 17:42:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 4 May 2007 17:42:55 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=antony@zend.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=antony@zend.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 212.25.124.162 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: antony@zend.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 212.25.124.162 mail.zend.com Linux 2.5 (sometimes 2.4) (4) Received: from [212.25.124.162] ([212.25.124.162:28852] helo=mail.zend.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 5E/96-17046-C907B364 for ; Fri, 04 May 2007 13:42:55 -0400 Received: (qmail 5143 invoked from network); 4 May 2007 17:42:49 -0000 Received: from internal.zend.office (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (10.1.1.1) by internal.zend.office with SMTP; 4 May 2007 17:42:49 -0000 Message-ID: <463B70A1.4010505@zend.com> Date: Fri, 04 May 2007 21:42:57 +0400 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marcus Boerger CC: Ilia Alshanetsky , internals@lists.php.net References: <139872287.20070504170744@marcus-boerger.de> <9DC00D11-00A5-40DB-A397-8454C48FA448@prohost.org> <1525138013.20070504193205@marcus-boerger.de> In-Reply-To: <1525138013.20070504193205@marcus-boerger.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Starting 5.3 From: antony@zend.com (Antony Dovgal) On 05/04/2007 09:32 PM, Marcus Boerger wrote: >> I really don't think we need phar in core, certainly not enabled by >> default. If someone can make a good case for including it, I'd love >> to hear it. > > Easier distributing/deployment of stuff and phar even allows to use the > packed files as is from within the package or unpacked without any > change. We use phar already for pear. Having the extension version that > allows the mentioned untouched unpacking feature would help a lot of > people. What's the problem with having it in PECL? I'm sure everybody interested in it can get it working in no more than 10 seconds using `pecl install phar`. -- Wbr, Antony Dovgal