Re: [PEAR-DEV]PEAR_Exception-1.0.0beta1 (beta) Released.

Hi,

CC:ing Till on this, looks like he is responsible for releasing PEAR_Exception 
and is the closest we have to PEAR package maintainer. :]

Meanwhile I was already able to close about a dozen obviously bogus / duplicate 
/ Archive_Tar-related bugs.

Also bug #18004 [1] left me wondering: why does PEAR contain a homegrown HTTP 
client? If we decide on releasing PHP5-only version, we may add HTTP_Request2 as 
a dependency which will allow some features not possible now (like HTTPS through 
proxy) and probably also improve performance a bit (due to using keep-alive).

[1] http://pear.php.net/bugs/bug.php?id=18004


On 26.02.2014 1:30, Christian Weiske wrote:
> Hello Alexey,
>
>
>> Helgi (or whoever released this), is this a good idea to do a
>> separate PEAR_Exception without releasing a new PEAR package
>> simultaneously? Current PEAR package contains PEAR_Exception class as
>> well and this will probably lead to conflicts.
> Yes, a new pear release is needed.
>
>
>> I don't quite remember what was the consensus last time this was
>> discussed, but from my point of view the best solution will be to
>> push a new PEAR 1.10.*
>>    * with dependency on PHP 5+
>>    * without bundled PEAR_Exception class but
>>    * with a required dependency on new PEAR_Exception package.
> Yep.
>
>> Also a new version of PEAR is long overdue with 1.9.4 released in
>> 2011 and 82 (!) bugs in the tracker.
>>
>> Is anyone working on PEAR at all? If not I may help a bit with bug
>> triage and possibly send some patches.
>
> Not really. Clockwerx is merging PRs now and then, but there are - in
> my eyes - some unstable patches in current master.
>
> The work we have to do is
> - create 1.10 branch
> - find out which patches can go into 1.10.0
> - cherry-pick them from master
>
> master is too unstable for a no-dedicated-maintainer release.
> The gpg validation for example is not ready for release.
>