I definitely would go for either .zip or .tar.gz. I think .zip on Windows is preferable but as .tar.gz is supported by Winzip it's OK too. I don't think it's right to start educating windows users like Gabor says. It has nothing to do with bzip2 being hard but with the fact that barely anyone has it installed under Windows.
Andi At 06:39 08/04/2002 +0100, James Cox wrote: >if we want to make our lives easier wrt windows users, we should support >.zip not tar.gz. > >+1 for .zip. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Gabor Hojtsy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 11:46 PM >To: Sander Roobol; Simone Cortesi >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; PHP Documentation >List >Subject: Re: [PHP-DOC] Bug #16476 Updated: unpacking > > > > >> > Anyway, the files unpack just fine on w2k with the right tools > > >> [tm] (i > > >> > used cygwin, bunzip2). If it doesn't work for you your tools are > > >> broken > > >> > or you don't know how to use them. > > >> > > >> Again, as nobody on windows is familiar with bzip2, which is > > >> perfectly > > >> normal as nobody else uses it, dont expect users to be familiar with > > >> it. > > >> > > >> i strongly recommend to use .tar.gz again. > > > > > > +1 > > > > And a +1 from me... > >-1. We need to educate the guys. Bzip2 is not that hard... > >Goba
