Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:115330 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 78439 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2021 14:36:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 6 Jul 2021 14:36:20 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3741E1804DB for ; Tue, 6 Jul 2021 07:58:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE, MISSING_HEADERS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_SBL,URIBL_SBL_A autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-il1-f181.google.com (mail-il1-f181.google.com [209.85.166.181]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Tue, 6 Jul 2021 07:58:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-il1-f181.google.com with SMTP id z1so21075598ils.0 for ; Tue, 06 Jul 2021 07:58:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:cc; bh=m4Ev2h78QQOvuCxB2WMOBOirgEjGIT99sEUXokSVVbs=; b=R+KEu1A+b3QzW76VpsQCfkPEykIvghyQDkO8QonRGW26WbAJVCdJQr1i3N+9dAaGfX 29xNmi6XSdzeLWNRIY6AfKDX3m9VbSf7zxW8J/ldn9659RAVcY201Dmhn1uT9Nq8taPH +eHGrfdPfGmdNl3TFc5Q8W+nCZxgh9XI9R4z9EDyoHj7M8b4ZDAAmfN9h3y/3C4kpduK L2XCDSoLNGq+Cr1BG2970bSdOhRIfG4Tjwgy6cQ6vgGf1zHQyFPZtJg9TT54u+l2prp2 braDnVinUXhCvJtV7NiUOg/bVAa3SM491nwFBUwO8hsgwdRWfWQ6+WOzoQF9eILknCIH npHQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:cc; bh=m4Ev2h78QQOvuCxB2WMOBOirgEjGIT99sEUXokSVVbs=; b=bCrN9mP7qQjnq1ZqcBf1FWoxIwgwQY2eI6MyiI8lRO8Zfbhkgst/NRqySM8OaGo0Hf czBjRUm+Rbs2xKwEMjTl7uJ1WMZMN+lRmbqBAkBraijtrnVM0tmim6L6QObuOBcUTB1R U2nhgvMnppzCH9DkZOXhNXBEM4lbsE5hVaNAgoxEdyPY/tj4cbW6QZltxyqPDf/mKQH4 CebWpTLhWg5YE25lyMwyi6TTCCn65ASW/aaE6/h0XM8OCVJHaPZ9AnNI5A4MCdbh59VB ltwaJprMSG14rFfFg5N1IPwK5+U8/hs+O76/gTIiSg/lMUCHMf9VBeE1B+DPdZaJ1IV5 /8UQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531d0f2NW8KTnwK0eUjn8AWztItAbu2CC1ih4nV6f2MfgG73mB9/ dYZp1OwYSXWdRkGoa6BrKx7nUGOZs2n+4JOLEqe2x1ePIAQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx084zH+kfSsJ6s1SFuJAJHB3KSSQL4PopKLiiPXSMV7mxVYB84Q+hsBdRXBvNJgIUqtPtEbZt1aew4aA7dXtM= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:1d12:: with SMTP id i18mr14963746ila.97.1625583485407; Tue, 06 Jul 2021 07:58:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2021 16:57:54 +0200 Message-ID: Cc: PHP internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003356dd05c675a676" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Under Discussion: Default User-Agent for cURL From: paresy@gmail.com (Michael Maroszek) --0000000000003356dd05c675a676 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Dear internals, I didn't receive any more feedback on this RFC, therefore I would like to start voting next week on the RFC as is. Rationale: - I would like to stick with a distinct curl.user_agent ini option to avoid the BC break. - Also using PHP_INI_ALL as the options visibility is matching the core user_agent options behaviour. That is being able to modify the user_agent via ini_set during runtime. Thank you for all the contributions! Am Di., 29. Juni 2021 um 10:35 Uhr schrieb Michael Maroszek < paresy@gmail.com>: > Hi! > > Would anyone else be in favor of reusing the user_agent setting for cURL > despite the BC break? > > At the moment all possibilities (user_agent, curl.user_agent > (PHP_INI_ALL), curl.user_agent (PHP_INI_SYSTEM)) seem to > have negative votes attached. > > I am unsure if it makes sense to go forward with the RFC and if I should > bring the RFC to a YES/NO vote for the feature itself and the three > mentioned possibilities to choose from as a secondary vote option. > > I'd love to get some help on how to proceed even if the answer might be: > don't proceed. > > > Am So., 27. Juni 2021 um 09:25 Uhr schrieb Aleksander Machniak < > alec@alec.pl>: > >> On 27.06.2021 08:48, Michael Maroszek wrote: >> > That's what I also thought when making the PR and therefore I initially >> > went with PHP_INI_ALL. >> > >> > But Tyson made a good point that the curl.cainfo is PHP_INI_SYSTEM and >> we >> > might want to be consistent about modes inside an extension. >> >> Another option might be PHP_INI_PERDIR (for both). Why? Because that's >> what's used for (similar) openssl extension configuration. >> >> ps. anyway, right now I'm on -1 for the new config option. >> >> -- >> Aleksander Machniak >> Kolab Groupware Developer [https://kolab.org] >> Roundcube Webmail Developer [https://roundcube.net] >> ---------------------------------------------------- >> PGP: 19359DC1 # Blog: https://kolabian.wordpress.com >> >> -- >> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List >> To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php >> >> --0000000000003356dd05c675a676--