Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:26860 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 9302 invoked by uid 1010); 9 Dec 2006 01:37:51 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 9287 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2006 01:37:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 9 Dec 2006 01:37:51 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=edink@emini.dk; spf=fail; sender-id=fail Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=edink@emini.dk; sender-id=fail Received-SPF: fail (pb1.pair.com: domain emini.dk does not designate 195.41.46.237 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: edink@emini.dk X-Host-Fingerprint: 195.41.46.237 pfepc.post.tele.dk Linux 2.5 (sometimes 2.4) (4) Received: from [195.41.46.237] ([195.41.46.237:40883] helo=pfepc.post.tele.dk) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 42/55-64559-B431A754 for ; Fri, 08 Dec 2006 20:37:51 -0500 Received: from [192.168.5.2] (x1-6-00-0f-b5-79-dc-41.k664.webspeed.dk [83.93.57.85]) by pfepc.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 914188A0018; Sat, 9 Dec 2006 02:37:08 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <457A1344.3030809@emini.dk> Date: Sat, 09 Dec 2006 02:37:08 +0100 Organization: Emini A/S User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (Windows/20061025) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ilia Alshanetsky CC: Stanislav Malyshev , PHP internals References: <3B40503A-75F6-41EC-BFCF-56D777501FA5@prohost.org> <4579A890.3040706@zend.com> <18DC7BB8-CE6D-4EFD-87DE-E0BF237284F8@prohost.org> In-Reply-To: <18DC7BB8-CE6D-4EFD-87DE-E0BF237284F8@prohost.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.1.0 OpenPGP: id=157D0FA8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Moving COM, Socket & mhash to PECL From: edink@emini.dk (Edin Kadribasic) Ilia Alshanetsky wrote: > Well, it does not consume any resources simply because no one is > maintaining it ;-). How really different things would be if it were in > pecl? I mean afaik COM is not enabled by default on win32, so you still > need to enable it manually. So, the only extra step for people who want > to use it would be to download it from pecl4win. This updates extensions > more frequently then we do releases, so it'd actually give people the > ability to get a more stable version (assuming bug fixes are made) far > sooner then they'd be able to otherwise. You know wrongly, COM is enabled and built in static as default. Removing it would be a very bad idea IMO, and I don't see why unix users should worry a few extra K in the source tarball. Edin