Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:27764
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain omniti.com designates 66.225.209.50 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: good
DomainKey-Signature: q=dns; a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
	s=test; d=omniti.com;
	h=Authentication-Results:Received:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Message-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding:From:Subject:Date:To:X-Mailer;
	b=Q6XiPM/Ky7FMF8zN6N87TDO7zllIa6WC+jCoqzpO9fA7CBDMZ3XujnveVTQxniy0
	JPkAN7OZvlOhytOUCeQpAPZMnSr39GiJNA7ZTpFZMFVvIxZnFACwrsPl+jsDeDOd
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-ID: <84D43AA9-5958-4E0B-8806-825B0CBA38BD@omniti.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 14:12:07 -0500
To: internals@lists.php.net
Subject: RFC extensions_path directive
From: wez@omniti.com (Wez Furlong)

We have a need for a search path for extensions, so that we can have  
a system provided set of extensions and an optional location for per- 
application extensions that either augment or override the baseline  
extensions.

To facilitate this, I propose that we create a new directive called  
extensions_path that allows the sysadmin to configure a search path  
for extensions.  I see the usage as going something like this:

extensions_path = "/local/extensions:$DEFAULT_EXTENSIONS_DIR"

Where $DEFAULT_EXTENSIONS_DIR evaluates to the default value of  
extensions_dir.
I think it's important to have a symbol for the default location, so  
that httpd.conf files don't have to have our API numbers encoded into  
them.

I don't mind if the actual symbol we use for the default manifests  
differently, so long as it works from within httpd.conf... if  
extensions_dir works there.  If it's php.ini only, I'm happy to use  
the existing constant expansion stuff we have for php.in... if that  
will work in a path string syntax.

I also don't mind if we simply expand extensions_dir to behave in  
this manner.

I just want to gather some feedback before writing some code.

To be super clear, I don't propose changing anything other than the  
searching behavior for extensions.

--Wez.