Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:14245
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Message-ID: <41D45743.6000502@php.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 14:30:11 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Macintosh/20041206)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Hans Zaunere <hans@nyphp.com>
CC: Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk>, internals@lists.php.net
References: <41EE526EC2D3C74286415780D3BA9F8707348D39@ehost011-1.exch011.intermedia.net>
In-Reply-To: <41EE526EC2D3C74286415780D3BA9F8707348D39@ehost011-1.exch011.intermedia.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Why we don't like PHP /
From: rasmus@php.net (Rasmus Lerdorf)

Hans Zaunere wrote:
> I know apache_hooks but after discussion with George and others, I
> wouldn't feel comfortable recommending to clients, especially with
> EXPERIMENTAL notes and no mention on php.net.  The potential
> functionality it could provide, however, would be very popular, on par
> with mod_rewrite.

Again, that has nothing to do with Apache2.  This same feature based on 
Apache2 isn't suddenly going to be non-experimental since the code would 
be mostly the same on the PHP side.  How we actually hook it in would be 
slightly different.

> Whatever the particular feature is, my point is that the killer-solution
> or feature will drive going on to new things.

Sure, but why Apache2?  Apache2 is a brand new server.  The next killer 
web server may just as easily be something completely different.

> Almost two years ago I ran PHP 4/Apache 2/threaded in production and it
> ran fine.  Of course, the only extensions I used were MySQL and Oracle.
> However, I've since gone back to Apache 1, simply because there was no
> compelling reason to live on the edge.  A chicken-and-egg problem, but
> perhaps it's time to think about incubating the egg.

But which egg?

-Rasmus