Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:16629 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 6439 invoked by uid 1010); 13 Jun 2005 09:02:19 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 6424 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2005 09:02:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO web.de) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 13 Jun 2005 09:02:19 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.187.204.232 dtm9-d9bbcce8.pool.mediaWays.net Received: from ([217.187.204.232:12370] helo=localhost.localdomain) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 1.2 r(5656M)) with SMTP id 47/99-20931-B9B4DA24 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 05:02:19 -0400 To: internals@lists.php.net,Derick Rethans Message-ID: <42AD4CE4.8080200@web.de> Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:07:48 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: de-DE, de, en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: Andi Gutmans References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050603203711.028e9140@localhost> <200506051859.53976.magnus@php.net> <6E.27.21296.C90E7A24@pb1.pair.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20050609153713.036905b0@localhost> <42A96AB5.1020509@web.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Posted-By: 217.187.204.232 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.1 From: akorthaus@web.de (Andreas Korthaus) Derick Rethans wrote: > On Fri, 10 Jun 2005, Andreas Korthaus wrote: > >>Will pecl_http be included? >>(AFAIR something like that has been discussed earlier this year on this list) > > > We have the policy of not adding more very specialized extensions to the > PHP core distribution - those extensions should live in PECL. Yes, that makes a lot of sense. I have seen that many core-Extensions have been moved to PECL, and I think is's the right way. But in php-core you have many similarly specialized Extensions, such as ftp, imap, snmp... And in my opinion HTTP is used more often than those core-Extensions. I'm reading and writing a lot in php-related forums and I do not hear people using those core-Extensions very often. But nearly every day I recommend people using things like PEAR::HTTP_Request (which is not easy to install in shared hosting, the alternative is writing your own userspace function/class using fsockopen...), or explain why "include($_GET['site']);" is not a good idea... I think pecl_http is not more specialized than most other core-Extensions, but from my (users) point of view it is a very valuable extension for most users. If it lives in PECL, I think must users will never use it. But it's not my decision ;-) best regards Andreas