Everything
php
Learn Community Releases The PHP Project
Home » Project » Newsgroups » php.internals » PHP 5.0.4 PEAR issue »

PHP 5.0.4 PEAR issue

php.internals

Zeev Suraski

21 years ago
Folks, We have a bit of a situation with the PEAR distro that's embedded in 5.0.4. It's missing the RunTest.php file, so PEAR doesn't install. The options we have, as far as I can tell, are: [a] Re-release 5.0.4 with that file [b] Release 5.0.5 with that file (seems a bit too aggressive considering there are no code changes, and may cause confusion) [c] Instruct people to install PEAR from http://go-pear.org I lean towards option [a]. Thoughts? Zeev

Adam Greenfield

21 years ago
I On Apr 1, 2005 5:00 PM, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> wrote:
> The options we have, as far as I can tell, are: > > [a] Re-release 5.0.4 with that file > [b] Release 5.0.5 with that file (seems a bit too aggressive considering > there are no code changes, and may cause confusion) > [c] Instruct people to install PEAR from http://go-pear.org >
[a] seems like the most sane choice to me. I would also just place a note on the site (maybe the download page?) explaining what happened and letting people know why the files changed.
-- Adam C. Greenfield <adam.greenfield@gmail.com>

Pierre-Alain Joye

21 years ago
On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 00:00:18 +0200 zeev@zend.com (Zeev Suraski) wrote:
> Folks, > > We have a bit of a situation with the PEAR distro that's embedded > in 5.0.4. It's missing the RunTest.php file, so PEAR doesn't > install. > > The options we have, as far as I can tell, are: > > [a] Re-release 5.0.4 with that file > [b] Release 5.0.5 with that file (seems a bit too aggressive > considering there are no code changes, and may cause confusion) > [c] Instruct people to install PEAR from http://go-pear.org > > I lean towards option [a]. Thoughts?
Agreed for [a]. --Pierre

Greg Beaver

21 years ago
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> Folks, > > We have a bit of a situation with the PEAR distro that's embedded in > 5.0.4. It's missing the RunTest.php file, so PEAR doesn't install. > > The options we have, as far as I can tell, are: > > [a] Re-release 5.0.4 with that file > [b] Release 5.0.5 with that file (seems a bit too aggressive considering > there are no code changes, and may cause confusion) > [c] Instruct people to install PEAR from http://go-pear.org > > I lean towards option [a]. Thoughts?
I think [a] is the best choice as well, perhaps with a brief note at php.net? This is my fault and is no April Fool's joke. The problem was that RunTest.php was sitting in my local checkout but was not properly cvs added, so my install tests worked just fine. This has been corrected. To avoid this for the future, I'm brainstorming ideas for a script that can be used to sync with released PEAR packages so that pear can be removed from php-src altogether in CVS, and simply synced as part of a cron job for the snaps machines. Any advice or admonitions would be appreciated. Greg Pierre: can we work on this in tandem?

Mike Robinson

21 years ago
Would 5.0.4pl1 be inappropriate? Two different versions of 5.0.4 seems odd, and 5.0.5 seems too drastic as you mentioned. Otherwise, IMHO, just make a brief announcement, point them to go-pear, and go through a normal 5.0.5 release cycle in a few weeks once a few more fixes make it in. Humbly, this isn't a big problem. Best, Mike Robinson Zeev Suraski wrote:

Derick Rethans

21 years ago
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Mike Robinson wrote:
> Would 5.0.4pl1 be inappropriate?
Yes, as we decided not to do that anymore and it looks "bad". Derick

Hartmut Holzgraefe

21 years ago
Derick Rethans wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Mike Robinson wrote: > > >>Would 5.0.4pl1 be inappropriate? > > > Yes, as we decided not to do that anymore and it looks "bad".
well, something bad has happened, so what? ;) better than the potential confusion IMHO
-- Hartmut Holzgraefe <hartmut@php.net>

Andrey Hristov

21 years ago
Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
> Derick Rethans wrote: > >> On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Mike Robinson wrote: >> >> >>> Would 5.0.4pl1 be inappropriate? >> >> >> >> Yes, as we decided not to do that anymore and it looks "bad". > > > well, something bad has happened, so what? ;) > > better than the potential confusion IMHO > >
and AFAIK version_compare() can handle pl1 I remember that once again in the past we had the same problem and Andi was advocating that once it is released it is released. andrey

Matthew Fonda

21 years ago
Option [a] seems like the most logical thing to do, would probably work the best. It might be nice to note on php.net somewhere right now before this is fixed that PEAR will not install.

James Ellis

21 years ago
Hi I think a 5.0.4.1 would be the best way to go (not sure what versioning to use), as there are no real code changes to justify a 5.05. You could then provide a patch with notes for those with 5.04 installed or they could compile 5.0.4.1 I'd suggest if you rerelease the 5.0.4 as "5.0.4" then those with 5.0.4 installed will become a bit confused as to what they have installed (unless they do the checksum check). As for the CVS issue, I find in the code I write, doing a "cvs diff ." on my local directory tells me if anything is not in the repository, then I can cvs add and cvs commit once done. I then tag with the version number, roll a release package and install it on a pre production machine. Once the package is tested on a pre production machine I know that it will be ok in userspace -- if not I source the problem and roll a pre producton package again. HTH James On Apr 1, 2005 8:25 PM, Matthew Fonda <mfonda@php.net> wrote:

Adam Maccabee Trachtenberg

21 years ago
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, James Ellis wrote:
> I think a 5.0.4.1 would be the best way to go (not sure what > versioning to use), as there are no real code changes to justify a > 5.05. You could then provide a patch with notes for those with 5.04 > installed or they could compile 5.0.4.1
Let's just rerelease 5.0.4 or go with 5.0.5. I don't want to go four number deep. :) -adam
-- adam@trachtenberg.com | http://www.trachtenberg.com author of o'reilly's "upgrading to php 5" and "php cookbook" avoid the holiday rush, buy your copies today!

Andi Gutmans

21 years ago
Hi James, We never had a fourth digit and I don't think we should introduce one now. Third digit (mini digit) is meant for only bug fix releases. I don't see harm in bumping that up by 1. We've done it in the past. Andi At 08:51 PM 4/1/2005 -0500, James Ellis wrote:

Andi Gutmans

21 years ago
I'd go for 5.0.5. I'm always wary about re-releasing the same version because then you can't know why someone's having a problem. At 12:00 AM 4/2/2005 +0200, Zeev Suraski wrote:

Zeev Suraski

21 years ago
I've repackaged 5.0.4 and posted it on php.net. The only difference is the addition of the missing file, everything else is identical. Zeev At 01:00 02/04/2005, Zeev Suraski wrote: