Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:29255
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain pooteeweet.org from 212.112.227.169 cause and error)
Message-ID: <463F1B3A.3070703@pooteeweet.org>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2007 08:27:38 -0400
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Stanislav Malyshev <stas@zend.com>
Cc: Marcus Boerger <helly@php.net>, internals@lists.php.net
References: <139872287.20070504170744@marcus-boerger.de> <9DC00D11-00A5-40DB-A397-8454C48FA448@prohost.org> <1525138013.20070504193205@marcus-boerger.de> <463B70A1.4010505@zend.com> <463B7232.7000205@php.net> <463B8B36.5010906@zend.com> <1992195966.20070504214413@marcus-boerger.de> <463B9271.3040009@zend.com> <1348470081.20070504221609@marcus-boerger.de> <463EB3FD.4020009@zend.com> <1062653277.20070507092725@marcus-boerger.de> <463ED871.8080606@zend.com>
In-Reply-To: <463ED871.8080606@zend.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Starting 5.3
From: mls@pooteeweet.org (Lukas Kahwe Smith)

Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>> It means you can run a phar file. How is that so hard to understand.
> 
> It is not hard to understand. What seems to be hard to understand is 
> that the scenario you describe is by no way the only scenario PHP files 
> run in. Not all applications are single entry point and of those that 
> are, not all applications are suitable to work in non-filesystem 
> environment. Thus using phar in applications not specifically designed 
> for it and in environments which presume files are in filesystem might 
> prove harder than some think.

So if you are wondering about use cases, the PEAR installer is a good 
example. Generally I would say phar lends itself for self installing 
applications, but also for applications you run infrequently, that are 
not that performance critical (which does not mean you want them to run 
extra slow either) and where you want minimal fuss in keeping an 
uptodate version.

I do not see phar's be used as the runtime after installation for most 
applications of course. But a sizeable number of them could be run this way.

Also it is one of those cases of "build it and they will come". So once 
we put this into core, people will take notice, tools will be developed, 
others will be adapted to become compatible etc.

Maybe we should for a moment shift the discussion from "if its useful" 
(because several half way smart people have said it is), to "is it 
technically sensibly implemented". Just give these guys the benefit of 
the doubt on the usefulness part and make sure its good on the 
implementation part.

regards,
Lukas

regards,
Lukas