version number and pake tarballs

[Gaetano Giunta]

In the https://github.com/indeyets/pake/wiki/Installing-Pake page there are instructions to produce a working pake.php out of a tarball gotten from a github tag.
I must have missed that, and started writing a pakefile.php file that made use of a locally installed copy of the pake tarball (unzipped). I even went so far as
including the complete pake sources in my own "deployment-script" application.

Now I see that the version number in my pakeApp class is not correct, and hence i cannot test for it.

As far as I can see, I have two options:
A. patch by hand the pakeAp.php file I ship in my app
B. ship instead the compacted pake.php I have just built

I am aware that option A is not the best long-term solution, but it is at the moment my preferred choice, as it is a one-line fix.

Is there any other implication / possibility I am missing?

Thanks
Gaetano

[Alexey Zakhlestin]

other possibility is to make pake.phar archive and ship that. (that
would be "pake phar" command from checkout)

Personally, I'm not a fan of hand-edited files, because there's a
chance to lose the "difference" during upgrade.
but in the end, any of these will work just find. choose the option you like :)

also note, that "compacted" pake.php doesn't include "plugins" by
default, but you can specify them as additional parameters while
generating

--
Alexey Zakhlestin, http://twitter.com/jimi_dini
http://www.milkfarmsoft.com/

[Gaetano Giunta]

Alexey Zakhlestin wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 10:57 PM, Gaetano Giunta<g...@ez.no> wrote:
>> In the https://github.com/indeyets/pake/wiki/Installing-Pake page there are
>> instructions to produce a working pake.php out of a tarball gotten from a
>> github tag.
>> I must have missed that, and started writing a pakefile.php file that made
>> use of a locally installed copy of the pake tarball (unzipped). I even went
>> so far as including the complete pake sources in my own "deployment-script"
>> application.
>>
>> Now I see that the version number in my pakeApp class is not correct, and
>> hence i cannot test for it.
>>
>> As far as I can see, I have two options:
>> A. patch by hand the pakeAp.php file I ship in my app
>> B. ship instead the compacted pake.php I have just built
>>
>> I am aware that option A is not the best long-term solution, but it is at
>> the moment my preferred choice, as it is a one-line fix.
>>
>> Is there any other implication / possibility I am missing?
> other possibility is to make pake.phar archive and ship that. (that
> would be "pake phar" command from checkout)

But that would imply that all users of my script have the phar extension installed, which I also cannot presume (afaik phar was not shipped by default until php
5.3)

> Personally, I'm not a fan of hand-edited files, because there's a
> chance to lose the "difference" during upgrade.
> but in the end, any of these will work just find. choose the option you like :)
>
> also note, that "compacted" pake.php doesn't include "plugins" by
> default, but you can specify them as additional parameters while
> generating

The fact that I might have extra plugins as part of my script was the reason not to try shipping a single file in the first place :)

Thanks for the insight
Gaetano