Re: Re: re-proposal of pecl/phar for inclusion in core

Hello Steph, so you mean we do not have to confuse our uses by solution 2a becasue we only have the minimum subset of zip in phar that ohar actually needs? marcus Monday, January 28, 2008, 7:01:42 PM, you wrote: > Hi Marcus, >> 1. include phar in core >> 2.a. add ext/zip compatible functions and replace ext/zip >> 2.b. change ext/zip to use zip lib of pahr and add stream support >> 3. drop ability to disable spl >> >> I have no preference between 2a or 2b. Though technically I guess that 2a >> is probably much faster to achive. > You're behind the times. Check it out; 18 of the 20 broken tests are down to > the fact that we can no longer 'knit' a pure zip archive because Greg > dropped the ext/zip dependency. >> p.s.: I haven't done much in regards to Phar lately - and can only say >> that >> you did an amazing not expect job. You turned Phar into something way >> better than we ever thought of. > Hear, hear! > - Steph Best regards, Marcus