Fri, 10 Apr 2026 13:16:55 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/6587 Integrate groupware PEAR-bundling into Horde base release tarballs Since we already bundle the necessary framework libraries with Horde tarball releases, how about doing the PEAR libs too? Wed, 09 Apr 2008 17:32:47 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/6587#t44529 I'm against it, because people still using separate installs do so because they want full control about all components. Bundled PEAR packages are not easily upgradeable, and might already be on the system, causing redundancy. This would also turn into a maintenance nightmare for distributions, that definitely don't want duplicate code in their packages. I think this would cause more trouble than it solves, if people want convenience, they can install the bundles. Wed, 09 Apr 2008 21:28:58 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/6587#t44543 PEAR is already tricky for distributions, since you don't get the same thing installing distro packages vs. using the PEAR command. And we've been burned multiple times by PEAR changes (DB.php quote(), etc.) when people upgrade. Distributing the supported package version with Horde could eliminate a lot of that. Unless we offer bundles with every single app combination or at least base app package (chora/whups/etc., hermes/minerva/etc.), I think a lot of people will use the tarballs that don't need special flexibility. And if they want to use their own PEAR libs they can adjust the include_path accordingly. Thu, 10 Apr 2008 05:25:42 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/6587#t44555 > PEAR is already tricky for distributions, since you don't get the > same thing installing distro packages vs. using the PEAR command. True, though this is the distribution's problem, not our. > And we've been burned multiple times by PEAR changes (DB.php quote(), > etc.) when people upgrade. Distributing the supported package version > with Horde could eliminate a lot of that. I guess this has been discussed back and forth in many projects that use PEAR packages. I sometimes get fed up with BC breaking stuff in PEAR too. But the counter argument is, that PEAR packages are usually updated much more frequently than Horde, so people won't get updates or even security fixes. > Unless we offer bundles with every single app combination or at least > base app package (chora/whups/etc., hermes/minerva/etc.), I think a > lot of people will use the tarballs that don't need special > flexibility. And if they want to use their own PEAR libs they can > adjust the include_path accordingly. If they have to install separate tarballs anyway, it doesn't add too much work to install PEAR packages IMO. Especially since the PEAR installer has much matured in the past. And I thought we would rather try to achieve more modularity, not less. Thu, 10 Apr 2008 09:43:41 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/6587#t44556 I guess there are two very different perspectives here: the viewpoint of a distribution and the viewpoint of the user installing horde on a webserver without support of package management from a distribution. > PEAR is already tricky for distributions, since you don't get the > same thing installing distro packages vs. using the PEAR command. > > And we've been burned multiple times by PEAR changes (DB.php quote(), > etc.) when people upgrade. Distributing the supported package version > with Horde could eliminate a lot of that. From the viewpoint of the distribution this is definitely the job of the package manager. Bundled PEAR packages only cause pain from that point of view because the least one has to do is to remove them. But I experience plenty of additional problems with bundled PEAR packages when packaging stuff for Gentoo. On the other hand this was often just caused by lazy devs and that wouldn't happen with Horde. > > Unless we offer bundles with every single app combination or at least > base app package (chora/whups/etc., hermes/minerva/etc.), I think a > lot of people will use the tarballs that don't need special > flexibility. And if they want to use their own PEAR libs they can > adjust the include_path accordingly. As bundled packages may be helpful for users without support of a fine distro I wonder if it wouldn't be possible to find a compromise and simply add a separate bundle tar.gz bundle of suggested PEAR packages. This way people might decide if they'd like to use it or not. Thu, 10 Apr 2008 10:05:06 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/6587#t44557 > As bundled packages may be helpful for users without support of a > fine distro I wonder if it wouldn't be possible to find a compromise > and simply add a separate bundle tar.gz bundle of suggested PEAR > packages. This way people might decide if they'd like to use it or > not. We did exactly this in the past, and it caused more problems than it solved in the end, mostly because of always being outdated, see my earlier comment. Thu, 10 Apr 2008 10:25:03 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/6587#t44560 Definitely more modularity, but that doesn't mean that we expose all of the modularity to the installing user. :) But I'm convinced for now. Thu, 10 Apr 2008 15:32:05 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/6587#t44571