I forgot to reply to the list.
--- Begin Message ---
Solution #2 would be great for silverorange. If we want the latest and
greatest from the incubator packages for our dev servers we can do a SVN
checkout. Also, we love your on-line documentation.
On Fri, 2007-02-02 at 14:05 -0800, Gavin Vess wrote:
> I see much value in each of the following scenarios, which combined form
> what I expect to cover the majority of use cases:
>
> 1) PEAR "component" distributing entire ZF (for developers interested
> primarily in the latest official release of the incubator, docs, and
> tests, with an easy mechanism to update to a future official release).
>
> 2) PEAR "component" distributing only the stable, production-ready code
> tree (for easy deployment to production servers)
>
> 3) SVN checkout of the entire ZF (for developers interested in the
> latest and greatest incubator, docs, and tests)
>
> 4) Downloadable tarballs/zip archives for those in a hurry, who want a
> specific release once and no updates.
>
> 5) Downloadable nightly snapshots for those who one to make a one-time
> evaluation/analysis of the latest versions of everything in our source
> code repository.
>
> 6) Online docs - I have a personal bias due to a belief that online
> documentation usually enables more rapid and frequent updates, user
> comments and contributions, and ease of use, thus resulting in greater
> developer productivity.
>
> Developers doing actual development probably want #1 or #3 for the
> reasons Matthew lists below.
> My personal preference for deploying to production servers is #2.
>
> Unfortunately, when we look at the directory structure
> (zftrunk/library/Zend and zftrunk/incubator/library/Zend) in combination
> with the conventions of PEAR components, combining both into a single
> PEAR component (i.e. #1 above) becomes slightly problematic, so #1 might
> not result in a convenient layout for some. I suggest we start with
> implementing #2 first by updating and finishing the system started at
> http://pear.zfdev.com/.
>
> Cheers,
> Gavin
>
> Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
> > -- Rob Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> > (on Friday, 02 February 2007, 06:42 AM +0000):
> >
> >> Michael Caplan wrote:
> >>
> >>> Being a newbie, perhaps I am overlooking something here, but I don't
> >>> understand your comment that "The Zend Framework works together, as a
> >>> complete unit." I understand their are various component dependencies,
> >>> but I don't believe that I can't use Zend_Pdf, for example, if the
> >>> _entire_ framework is not installed. If PDF generation is my goal, I
> >>> don't care to have to install 15MB of framework just to use that piece.
> >>> If anything I see that as being an inhibitor for framework use,
> >>> especially as the core framework size grows (and it is, isn't it?).
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Personally, I think that we should consider packaging up just library/
> >> for each release in addition to the entire caboodle that we do at the
> >> moment.
> >>
> >> Certainly, on our production servers, we don't need demos/
> >> documentation/, incubator/ or tests/.
> >>
> >
> > Just a note: most PEAR packages contain, minimally, tests, and often
> > documentation and examples. Granted, however, the ZF documentation is
> > the larger part of the install, so it may make sense to have it
> > available separately.
> >
> > (It's good to have the tests available, as you may run them on an
> > architecture different than those developing a component, which may
> > expose new errors. Additionally, tests show you how the code is intended
> > to work.)
--- End Message ---
