Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:47622
Return-Path: <dreamcat4@gmail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 81509 invoked from network); 25 Mar 2010 21:54:06 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 25 Mar 2010 21:54:06 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=dreamcat4@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=dreamcat4@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.220.225 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: dreamcat4@gmail.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.220.225 mail-fx0-f225.google.com  
Received: from [209.85.220.225] ([209.85.220.225:55103] helo=mail-fx0-f225.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id 10/DD-11385-D7BDBAB4 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Thu, 25 Mar 2010 16:54:05 -0500
Received: by fxm25 with SMTP id 25so14350fxm.23
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Thu, 25 Mar 2010 14:54:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references
         :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=TuEagoGlhdfkPz4KJfp35xXjMJJeUfJfdUEeGZQkIB8=;
        b=tJ/A6w+Ng6jBcAPxjmZbS4wHhnowFO+FVv1RZmoKrWpu3t7z9hz5B2GXMU3Qeorb9z
         kzRWgNAPf0Y073o9s3SJQQurqpOh3T3piyaSk86faCzrypzDQ+rR9Vo/ag8hM9AbYf4q
         bGQMuwlT1P10jzCz+Np10L96LDIFV9IDTz9/I=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
         :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=JSTmw7YjUCrgJ/IdFL6rL73PHd7UXr64T3kEQG5PUDu8gXW8UGohWqF4AZJNSv9txz
         gEnb3oG/n44HWyXl7fo+Q13hy1jvn0Swx0neIseVH5izUBz8cRngp7pPcII0gH5U+AXA
         isf6ZZobBHSOqI0BsrPBwO3UKb95KtcS+iaFE=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.15.148 with SMTP id k20mr1317128faa.67.1269554041211; Thu, 
	25 Mar 2010 14:54:01 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <3bea96c41003250709jd391239te35ab88b46e4803e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4BA8EF6F.8010503@daylessday.org> <4BA92B72.1050207@daylessday.org> 
	<7.0.1.0.2.20100323230046.12e71d80@zend.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1003232155350.4153@kossu.derickrethans.nl> 
	<7.0.1.0.2.20100324000837.13ff3080@zend.com> <4BA9CB98.6080102@daylessday.org> 
	<7.0.1.0.2.20100324102437.0b491a68@zend.com> <4BA9D167.30006@daylessday.org> 
	<99cf22521003240334y6fb76fbcs4347429f3be48d49@mail.gmail.com> 
	<3bea96c41003250709jd391239te35ab88b46e4803e@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 21:53:41 +0000
Message-ID: <99cf22521003251453k4a9a5d4n5b7522f0c677d037@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWUgTG95ZXQ=?= <jerome@loyet.net>
Cc: Antony Dovgal <tony@daylessday.org>, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com>, Derick Rethans <derick@php.net>, 
	php-dev <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] FPM RFC
From: dreamcat4@gmail.com (dreamcat four)

2010/3/25 J=C3=A9r=C3=B4me Loyet <jerome@loyet.net>:
> I made some conf file exemple to really see what it will be:
>
> <snip>
>
> http://www.fatbsd.com/fpm/ini_with_sections_and_default_and_include.html
>
> From my point of vue, a conf file should be the less redundant as
> possible and should be splitable in different files (in the case of
> huge conf file, or when several administrators work on the conf files,
> each pool has a file, and each pool administrator manage its own
> file). So the INI syntax with sections to seraparate pools, with
> include and the default pool is, for me, the best options we have
> here. It's quite simple, it's clear and customizable.
>
> To compare, I put the same in the current XML syntax :
> http://www.fatbsd.com/fpm/xml.html
>
> what do you think ?
>
> ++ Jerome

http://www.fatbsd.com/fpm/ini_with_sections_and_default_and_include.html

Hey,
Thats the ticket Jerome! Maybe we have our winning INI scheme yet eh?

Maybe id suggest (on top of that scheme), the main config file (which
you labelled "/etc/fpm.conf"), to need only just the overidden options
users want? So therefore the factory defaults file would be included
earlier on, and tucked away somewhere else?

Apart from that 1 suggestion, I cant see anything to improve upon. The
standard seems good. I dont know if the whole internals list and / or
Antony would agree but in anycase, this thread seems pretty exhausted
now.

If you intend to implement this Jerome, then perhaps (any time when /
after you implement), just make new (seperate) RFC for that (just the
ini). Which (obviously) can be attached as single dependancy of this
RFC. That way, those comments / feedback can come directed back for
just you (on your chosen, preferred ini implementation). And we don't
get confused over the other ini examples.


Best regards

dreamcat4
dreamcat4@gmail.com