What's the point of creating HTTP_Download2 when there's already
HTTP_Request(2) and even PEAR2_HTTP_Request? Aren't they essentially
fulfilling the same purpose (with the PEAR2 variant being the
namespaced incarnation) of HTTP_Download?
2012/1/9 till <
till@...>:
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Kingsquare.nl - Robin Speekenbrink <
>
robin@...> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> As per the blogpost asking for packages which arent moved to github yet to
>> move them: here's one: HTTP_Download.
>>
>> In order to have PHP5.3 code without deprecation notices (and php5.4+
>> might fail comepletely) i would also at the same time like to see the patch
>> on
http://pear.php.net/bugs/bug.**php?id=17418<
http://pear.php.net/bugs/bug.php?id=17418>be committed: by removing the references from construction, it would work
>> without erros :)
>>
>> If I can help, please let me know!
>
>
> I agree on the move. But since HTTP_Download's minimum PHP version is
> 4.2.x, your patch would break BC.
>
> I think once the code is moved, we should create HTTP_Download2, apply your
> patch, update all class names, docs etc.. And release a 0.1.0 of it and
> mark the old package superceeded. That would be the clean way to go about
> it. With an alpha release and HTTP_Download2 the code could be updated for
> PHP 5.3+ or whatever people feel like.
>
> I've cc'd the active maintainer to see what he thinks. Though I hope no one
> would object to leaving PHP4 behind. ;-)
>
> Till
>
>
>>
>>
>> --
>> With kind regards,
>>
>> Robin Speekenbrink
>> Kingsquare Information Services
>>
>> --
>> PEAR Development Mailing List (
http://pear.php.net/)
>> To unsubscribe, visit:
http://www.php.net/unsub.php>>
>>
--
PEAR Development Mailing List (
http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit:
http://www.php.net/unsub.php
