Re: 2.0.0 (Re: [PEAR-DEV] PEAR 1.9.5 testing)

From: Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 16:28:54 +0000
Subject: Re: 2.0.0 (Re: [PEAR-DEV] PEAR 1.9.5 testing)
References: 1 2 3 4  Groups: php.pear.dev 
Request: Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-55382@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
Hi Till, On 15.07.2014 20:11, till wrote:
was wondering what you thought about going 2.0.0-alpha1 and dropping PHP4 support once and for all.
Where does that leave Pyrus?
I don't see a future for Pyrus. Nobody is working on it, and it is not on-par with the features PEAR currently has - as well as a plethora of open bugs I opened years ago. See https://github.com/pyrus/Pyrus/issues
I agree with Christian. My thoughts were not to throw it all away and write the installer from scratch.
"Not keeping BC / going 2.0.0 / whatever" is only needed if we rewrite from scratch.
An alpha1 could have bugfixes and so on from the roadmap and maybe one or two dependencies swapped out/updated. E.g. I'd rather use HTTP_Request2 in there than to rewrite another HTTP layer, etc.. I'd swap out pecl-related code for pickle[1] etc. pp.. Why — because it's code that's maintained.
Yes, I'm going to change PEAR to use HTTP_Request2. This does not require version 2.0.0 and will not break BC.
Just granularly tackle current issues and modernize the code base. Not a complete rewrite. (cc Alexey)
What prevents doing it with version 1.10?
A 2.0 would allow us BC breaks, e.g. to drop PHP4 support, which might even make it fun to work on it.
We don't need a BC break to drop PHP4 support, this was discussed quite a bit, I think. I'd suggest going with Pyrus if we want a brand new version, its problems are not code-related but [lack-of-]doc-related and people-related mostly.

« previous php.pear.dev (#55382) next »