Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:18509
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20050828163816.033d4d20@bla>
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 16:38:31 +0200
To: internals@lists.php.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: PHP 5.1: Does it still require ext/xmlrpc
	for	pear?
From: thetaphi@php.net (Uwe Schindler)

At 16:23 28.08.2005, you wrote:
>'Replace'?  Code written for ext/xmlrpc won't work with ext/xmlrpci.  Will
>ext/xmlrpc be available in PECL, given that it doesn't appear to have an
>active maintainer?
>
>I'm well aware of ext/xmlrpc's limitations, haven't tried the new (but
>necessary) pecl/xmlrpci yet, and have the tiny issue that a bunch of my
>scripts will need a complete rewrite if the old extension is simply taken
>away from PHP 5 up.  I suspect I'm far from being alone in that - do we have
>figures for core extension usage, anyone?

How about placing some compatibility functions in ext/xmlrpci or a 
PEAR package that emulates this using xmlrpci, if it is not too 
development expensive? This would put everything to libxml2 and 
everybody would be happy.

Why do we need to completely rewrite all this xmlrpc stuff? Because 
SOAP uses XMLRPC in SOAP envelopes (when encoding is rpc) - why not 
reuse the soap extension for plain xmlrpc without soap envelopes?

-----
Uwe Schindler
thetaphi@php.net - http://www.php.net
NSAPI SAPI developer
Bremen, Germany