Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:35235
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com from 64.97.136.159 cause and error)
Message-ID: <00a401c868ab$57ceb500$c6fc1f3e@foxbox>
Reply-To: "Steph Fox" <steph@zend.com>
To: "Marco" <markright@gmail.com>
Cc: "Derick Rethans" <derick@php.net>,
	"Marcus Boerger" <helly@php.net>,
	"internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <01c801c865d8$2e837e90$c6fc1f3e@foxbox> <14581063.20080203002104@marcus-boerger.de> <005201c8660f$66a2b160$c6fc1f3e@foxbox> <alpine.DEB.0.98.0802041032220.10785@kossu.ez.no> <00f501c86743$e5122320$c6fc1f3e@foxbox> <alpine.DEB.0.98.0802060940100.4967@kossu.ez.no> <2fd662a00802060057r51bdbb6dqd0b6c65133424618@mail.gmail.com> <005101c868a2$aaf235d0$c6fc1f3e@foxbox> <2fd662a00802060212v245b9645q2449735c0d660667@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 10:30:47 -0000
Organization: Zend Technologies
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Splitting the subject: the PECL/PHP relationship
From: steph@zend.com ("Steph Fox")

Hi Marco,

> I think one of the reasons hosts don't like / use PECL is trust, they 
> trust
> what comes with the PHP core packages and consider anything else a 
> security
> risk. Maybe a combination of better distribution, package details, 
> stability
> (beta / alpha) etc and maybe something that deals with compatibility. IE,
> compatible with PHP 5.2.1 - 5.3.0 for example.

This is precisely what I'm suggesting. Groups of extensions, classified in 
terms of general usefulness + stability, released alongside PHP releases (no 
question about compatibility that way.) In doze terms that would translate 
to a smaller bundle of .dlls (as opposed to the 100-ish we currently get if 
we download the PECL bundle), in *nix terms it would probably equate to 
either a group 'pecl install' command or a bundle of rpms (or both). 
Everyone can still use the routes they already use to get hold of the more 
esoteric bits and pieces, but there'd be a group of recommended extensions 
handy that hosts at least shouldn't be afraid to install. That in turn 
should make it easier for users to get those extensions enabled.

 Not sure how many of the
> larger bulk hosting companies monitor these lists but maybe trying to 
> foster
> more enagement from the bulk hosters in their concerns etc could be 
> useful?

Just check the list archives. Tho' I agree it would be helpful if those same 
people would butt in at this point.

> Again these are just the experiences I have with the hosts i've had to 
> deal
> with whilst trying to develop an app that will run anywhere (not an easy
> task I can tell you!).

Not an easy task, and made harder by the fact that stuff moves in and out of 
core from/to a place hosts don't generally go.

- Steph

>
> Regards
>
> Marco
>