Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:47516
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 212.25.124.185 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20100323230221.12e71af0@zend.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 23:05:52 +0200
To: "Antony Dovgal" <tony@daylessday.org>
Cc: <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <4BA92AD2.8010709@daylessday.org>
References: <4BA8EF6F.8010503@daylessday.org>
 <4BA8F72E.5090701@sci.fi>
 <4BA8F985.1090109@daylessday.org>
 <bd9320b31003231226v302da734g391a9eff9494bccf@mail.gmail.com>
 <4BA919D2.3060605@daylessday.org>
 <7.0.1.0.2.20100323222839.12d7b088@zend.com>
 <4BA92AD2.8010709@daylessday.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] FPM RFC
From: zeev@zend.com (Zeev Suraski)

At 22:55 23/03/2010, Antony Dovgal wrote:

>On 03/23/2010 11:31 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> > It's not clear at all.  In fact I think it was very clear that using
> > php.ini syntax (together with sections if necessary) is very much an
> > option, and I think mostly everyone here leaned towards it.
>
>Just take a look at it:
><http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/branches/PHP_5_3_FPM/sapi/fpm/php-fpm.conf.in?revision=292487&view=markup>http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/branches/PHP_5_3_FPM/sapi/fpm/php-fpm.conf.in?revision=292487&view=markup
>
>How do you propose to describe the same set of options using php.ini syntax?
>Yes, simple things like "value=Yes/No" or "value=DIR" fit just fine 
>into php.ini.
>But how would decribe a set of pools each with its own set of options?
>(taking into account that some of these options may override global options)

option...
anotheroption...

[pool1]
option...
anotheroption...

[pool2]
option...
anotheroption...

> > By using syntax we're using everywhere else for configuration,
> > instead of introducing a brand new one.
>
>This is not a php.ini, this is a different config file for a 
>different service.
>You don't expect Apache to switch to php.ini syntax just because 
>it's nice and familiar, do you?

It's a config for a part of PHP, not Apache.  I do expect it to look 
like everything else I configure in PHP.  There appear to be good 
reasons to separate it from php.ini - but not for having it use 
different syntax.

> > .ini is also easier than XML for mere mortals.
>
>Now I was never an XML fan myself, but I think THIS particular XML config file
>is even easier to read and understand than php.ini.

We can agree to disagree on that - it's subjective - but objectively 
.ini is PHP's way of setting configuration, XML is not.

Zeev