Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:39890
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 64.99.136.133 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <026d01c8fc97$4e3f4650$4501a8c0@foxbox>
To: "Antony Dovgal" <tony@daylessday.org>
Cc: "Pierre Joye" <pierre.php@gmail.com>,
	"php-dev" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <4892E15D.1080004@daylessday.org> <48A19D61.6080502@daylessday.org> <fe05d1540808120750w103cdafehdf0440ef2f60cd4d@mail.gmail.com> <48A1A631.20506@daylessday.org> <01da01c8fc8d$d3249f00$4501a8c0@foxbox> <48A1ABFA.6080701@daylessday.org> <020201c8fc92$f95d86a0$4501a8c0@foxbox> <48A1B49B.8010608@daylessday.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:20:13 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] enabling everything by default
From: steph@php.net ("Steph Fox")

> I assigned it to me in order to keep track of it.

Ack, it's not a *problem*, I'm very glad someone's doing that. Just this 
time it meant there was an open Phar bug that none of the Phar team knew 
existed for the last few weeks.

>> We've had two alphas and a beta release between March and now, and 
>> another beta release is planned in PECL shortly. (In fact I had hoped it 
>> would be this week, since Greg's now able to communicate again.) I think 
>> 5 months is a reasonable length of time for an extension to be in 
>> alpha-beta, personally.
>
> You can't call it alpha, continue active development for two months and 
> then call it stable, that's pointless.

The first beta release was in May. There's been no active development since 
Dmitry's 'Phar week', and aside from that there's been no active development 
since June.

> The diff since March is more than 1Mb, it's a different extension already.

Try a diff since the last beta release. I think you'll find most of it's 
either whitespace or tests - the remainder shouldn't add up to much.

>>> At this moment I don't see any reasons to call ext/phar "stable", 
>>> therefore it should not be enabled by default.
>>
>> PHP_5_3 is also not called "stable" at this point. It'd be a different 
>> matter if it were.
>
> Correct.
> But they don't install it by default on all computers.

Exactly :) so there's no problem in having an extension in beta alongside 
it.

- Steph