The change is very light, I applied it almost unchanged on Squeak (can't remember which version was the first).
The only thing we neeed is to catch an UTF8Error.

Since in Pharo there are two encoder/decoder hierarchies, and since that of Zinc is cleaner, I made a bet on future and chose to make UTF8Error a subclass of existing already Zn Encoding/Decoding exception.

But we still use the old TextConverter hierarchy in MC, even in Pharo 3.0.
So the dependency on Zinc is totally arbitrary and un-necessary right now; it does not exist in Smalltalk version.
It's just a bet on the future.
For a backport to 2.0, I would just use an UTF8Error like in Squeak and avoid any dependency on Zinc.

Nicolas


2013/6/19 GOUBIER Thierry <thierry.goubier@cea.fr>
St�phane,

I'll probably have a look at Nicolas fix anyway, but as it required also a change to Zinc... then I started to worry. But it may be better than trying to fix ZipArchive incorrect encoding issues from the outside (by forcing an utf8 conversion out of the contents of the ZipArchive members).

If I manage to make sense of it, I'll put a enhancement request in FogBuz with a slice.

Yes, I think 30 is not that unstable, like 2.0 was before ... except that I'm fairly dependent on the RPackage infrastructure, and I prefer to wait until the RPackage refactoring is done ;-)

Thierry

________________________________________
De : Pharo-dev [pharo-dev-bounces@lists.pharo.org] de la part de St�phane Ducasse [stephane.ducasse@inria.fr]
Date d'envoi : mercredi 19 juin 2013 21:21
� : Pharo Development List
Objet : Re: [Pharo-dev] you may need to update your configurations

>
>
>> Christophe.
>>
>> [1] https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10801
>
> Ouch. Does not bode too well for backporting that to Pharo 2.0.
>
> I'm feeling a bit down. It's either enduring bugs in 2.0 for a year or so or fighting every few days with 3.0 and knowing that anyway it's not production ready. I had to cope with 1.4 not being able to handle utf8 in the same way.

Thierry what we can do is the following:
� � � � have a look at the fix of nicolas and we can try to add to th 2.0 batch but we should pay attention
� � � � not to introduce other bugs (because I'm afraid it will).

BTW 30 is not that instable.


> The window for my next serious developpement with Pharo is around 2014, so I guess I could just sit and wait.
>
> By the way, why the change in MonticelloFileTree-Core-ChristopheDemarey.97 breaks Pharo 2.0 ?