Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:45374 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 75206 invoked from network); 24 Aug 2009 23:09:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 24 Aug 2009 23:09:40 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ezyang@MIT.EDU; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ezyang@MIT.EDU; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain MIT.EDU designates 18.7.7.80 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ezyang@MIT.EDU X-Host-Fingerprint: 18.7.7.80 BISCAYNE-ONE-STATION.MIT.EDU Solaris 9 Received: from [18.7.7.80] ([18.7.7.80:36508] helo=biscayne-one-station.mit.edu) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 63/3E-03363-4BD139A4 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2009 19:09:40 -0400 Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH.MIT.EDU [18.7.22.103]) by biscayne-one-station.mit.edu (8.13.6/8.9.2) with ESMTP id n7ON9ZF1013349; Mon, 24 Aug 2009 19:09:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (dhcp-18-111-25-106.dyn.mit.edu [18.111.25.106]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as ezyang@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.6/8.12.4) with ESMTP id n7ON9ZRt026904; Mon, 24 Aug 2009 19:09:35 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: internals To: Pierre Joye In-reply-to: References: <1251149348-sup-4709@javelin> <1251151666-sup-9840@javelin> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 19:09:35 -0400 Message-ID: <1251153827-sup-3119@javelin> User-Agent: Sup/git Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.42 X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.00 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Per-directory PHP configuration From: ezyang@MIT.EDU ("Edward Z. Yang") Excerpts from Pierre Joye's message of Mon Aug 24 18:21:32 -0400 2009: > Please point out the differences and list what else you may need. I do > not think we will introduce another feature but improve the current > implementation. As I understand it, the features are not compatible. One takes an explicit list of directories to scan, while the other dynamically determines it based on the current working directory and the user's home directory. (There are some other features on top of this, but that's the essential functionality). Please let me know if I am mistaken. > It is easy to make htscanner support ini format instead :) That is true. However, it would be nice to see this go into the core, so as to encourage wide use (also, htscanner is something of a hack, quite frankly.) Cheers, Edward