Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:29313
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net from 85.214.94.56 cause and error)
Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 11:07:46 +0200
Reply-To: Marcus Boerger <helly@php.net>
Message-ID: <67047512.20070508110746@marcus-boerger.de>
To: Pierre <pierre.php@gmail.com>
CC: internals@lists.php.net
In-Reply-To: <fe05d1540705080158v606af547oa8b661e0d68a7835@mail.gmail.com>
References: <139872287.20070504170744@marcus-boerger.de> <1062653277.20070507092725@marcus-boerger.de> <463ED871.8080606@zend.com> <463F1B3A.3070703@pooteeweet.org> <463F74EA.7030704@zend.com> <1377895609.20070507211530@marcus-boerger.de> <463F8909.6000709@zend.com> <alpine.DEB.0.98.0705080822260.27587@kossu.ez.no> <fe05d1540705080113u2f675932i16de5ac6f997406f@mail.gmail.com> <1376921277.20070508103616@marcus-boerger.de> <fe05d1540705080158v606af547oa8b661e0d68a7835@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Starting 5.3
From: helly@php.net (Marcus Boerger)

Hello Pierre,

Tuesday, May 8, 2007, 10:58:19 AM, you wrote:

> On 5/8/07, Marcus Boerger <helly@php.net> wrote:

>> Now adding Pecl/Zip was a clever idea as it allows an easy way to
>> compress stuff on the fly for sites that offer downloads. However
>> this is a) far far away from a mainstream problem

> And to read zip files (upload, ftp, remote data). I think each of us
> has had to deal with zip data (read or write) more than once. It is a
> mainstream need. Or if you mean that phar is not a mainstream problem
> then I agree. But I don't really see the point to compare both, they
> are too completely different extension (general purpose and
> developer/packager extension).

I hoped to make clear that even all of them are package extensions
at least to me they severe a different purpose. Especially I wanted
to point out that we should not make any of them executeable like
JARs.

> I'm in general in favour of phar but I don't think we should start 5.3
> for it. I don't think either that it is stable enough to be bundled. I
> doubt it is possible to have a stable package in only three public
> releases (even the first public release was already marked stable).

We do not need to create 5.3 to bundle it. And well if you design
something and test it thoroully you can mark even the first public
release as stable. We've even put phar to gcov.php.net prior to
releasing it to prevent memleaks and ensure a pretty high quality.
After that we waited ffor another half year and only then after
still being sure it works (by checking that it worked for us) we
released it.

> However once this package got a wider audience and users base, I don't
> have real objections to do not bundle it even if I still think that
> phar is a packager tool and have little to do with the mainstream
> needs.

In this case the audience is the PHP_Archive audience as well.
It is one of the things PECL was designed for. Develop something
in PHP and the turn it into a PHP extension.

> --Pierre



Best regards,
 Marcus