A better example might be Python Eggs. You can unpack them to a directory of your choosing using a simple CLI-bootstrap file.
Symfony does use Pear, but Symfony is not very shared-hosting friendly -- and Zend *is* shared-hosting friendly, which is something that I would very much like to see the community maintain. -K On Jan 22, 2008 6:12 PM, Kevin McArthur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -1 from me on this idea. > > Pear updating something as fragile as the framework could cause all kinds > of serious problems for sites using it as a shared library. > > It would be better to have a cli tool for framework installation.. a web > installer like go-pear would probably be a better format for this. > > I'd also still continue to advocate when using a shared library approach > that people use a versioned installation path like > /usr/share/php/ZendFramework/ZendFramework-1.5 such that bootstrap files > can pick their target versions explicitly. > > Kevin > > > > Wil Sinclair wrote: > > Actually, I'm a bit ignorant since I'm a relative PHP newbie, but let me > turn that question around- why would a PEAR channel be a good way to > distribute ZF? That is, considering the current ZF installation is basically > download, decompress, and update include path, what does PEAR bring to the > table that I'm missing? > > > > ,Wil > > > > *From:* Bryce Lohr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] > > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 22, 2008 2:13 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [fw-general] ZF Packaging > > > > I second the request for PEAR channel. Is there any reason why that would > not be a good way to distribute the framework? > > Regards, > Bryce Lohr > > > Pádraic Brady wrote: > > *Hi Will, > > It sounds good - an optional lean package would frighten off far less > prospective users who have heard tales about HDD's dying from the strain of > downloading the ZF ;). > I would still like to see a PEAR channel emerge at some point though - > that may be a fanciful concept but I gather from the last paragraph > something along those lines is under consideration? > Hope someone comes up with colourful names for these variants! > > Best regards, > Paddy* > > > > *Pádraic Brady > > **http://blog.astrumfutura.com > http://www.patternsforphp.com > OpenID Europe Foundation <http://www.openideurope.eu/>* > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Wil Sinclair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 8:36:39 PM > Subject: [fw-general] ZF Packaging > > As part of the 1.5 release process, we've been reviewing the size of our > distribution package and what contributes the most weight. We've > determined that there are a few 'heavyweights' that we currently have in > the zips/tarballs that many- if not most- users will never need. These > include the unit tests, the demos, and the locale files (currently > consuming ~8MB uncompressed on my hdd :O). With these components, the > 1.0.3 release is ~5.3MB compressed on my hdd. We would like to > distribute, starting with the 1.5 RC1, a 'lean and mean' ZF package > alongside the 'everything' package. The 'lean and mean' package would > not contain the tests, demos, locale files, or extras. 'Everything' > would include, well, everything- even docs in html format. To facilitate > access to the omissions from the 'lean and mean' release, we would > provide a download action for the CLI tool so they can be retrieved and > installed in the correct place with a single command. > Thomas can give more details about how the locale-aware components would > behave in this proposal. > Thoughts? > > Thanks. > ,Wil > > > >
