Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:39882
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 85.214.94.56 as permitted sender)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:35:10 +0200
Reply-To: Marcus Boerger <helly@php.net>
Message-ID: <831897186.20080812173510@marcus-boerger.de>
To: Antony Dovgal <tony@daylessday.org>
CC: Steph Fox <steph@php.net>, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>, 
	php-dev <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <48A1ABFA.6080701@daylessday.org>
References: <4892E15D.1080004@daylessday.org> <48A19D61.6080502@daylessday.org> <fe05d1540808120750w103cdafehdf0440ef2f60cd4d@mail.gmail.com> <48A1A631.20506@daylessday.org> <01da01c8fc8d$d3249f00$4501a8c0@foxbox> <48A1ABFA.6080701@daylessday.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] enabling everything by default
From: helly@php.net (Marcus Boerger)

Hello Antony,

Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 5:27:54 PM, you wrote:

> On 12.08.2008 19:12, Steph Fox wrote:
>> Hi Tony,
>> 
>>> No, I said I'm going to disable new extension that is known to cause 
>>> obscure problems in the past and that still does cause them at present,
>>> and that was (mistakenly) enabled by default right after its creation.
>> 
>> That really wasn't an obscure bug once the user posted the dump. 
>> Re-assigning it as a Phar bug would've meant it got fixed at the point Greg 
>> asked 'are there any open Phar bugs?', if not before...!

> Not sure what you meant here, but I've been informed about it about 1 hour ago.
> Surely asking "how many bugs are left" is quite useless, there is bug DB search,
> there should be some test facilities.

> See, I personally keep my extensions in alpha-beta status for quite a long time just to
> make sure they're mature enough to be called "stable".

> At this moment I don't see any reasons to call ext/phar "stable", therefore it should
> not be enabled by default. Especially taking into account its complexity and the fact
> that it "intercepts" core functions, which potentially may break everything, not just
> phar_*() functions.

> This is not an attack on ext/phar as somebody might have thought, I just don't want
> to see yet another release fail.

As much sense as that makes. Phar was pretty stable and had it users. Now
for 5.3 we added a ton of new features. It is only naturally that we still
might have small issues, maybe even a few that cause real problems. But as
said, we'll be fixing them hopefully prior to the release.

Best regards,
 Marcus