Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:55401 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 58824 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2011 14:52:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 13 Sep 2011 14:52:54 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=johannes@schlueters.de; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=johannes@schlueters.de; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain schlueters.de from 217.114.211.66 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: johannes@schlueters.de X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.114.211.66 config.schlueters.de Received: from [217.114.211.66] ([217.114.211.66:43843] helo=config.schlueters.de) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id AF/CF-06182-24E6F6E4 for ; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 10:52:51 -0400 Received: from [192.168.2.230] (ppp-93-104-106-47.dynamic.mnet-online.de [93.104.106.47]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by config.schlueters.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DB0E7775F8; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 16:52:46 +0200 (CEST) To: Kalle Sommer Nielsen Cc: Internals In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 16:52:07 +0200 Message-ID: <1315925527.1441.412.camel@guybrush> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] APC in 5.4 From: johannes@schlueters.de (Johannes =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Schl=FCter?=) Hi, On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 03:04 +0200, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote: > Hi > > This have been a while since we had the discussions about APC in 5.4 > (or in general extensions to move in and out of the Core, but more > about that in another thread). > > http://markmail.org/message/4w6lcbunw3qfof3c I think the conclusion was that we should include it (that's btw. a thought since the beginning of PHP 6) but anytime it was discussed it was premature. In general I'd tend to drop stuff from PHP instead of adding it. We ship quite a few extensions where I claim that we don't do any testing and little maintenance. I would reduce the distribution size and include things we consider "core PHP" and enable these by default in the hope that gives developers a clear guidance and what they should be able to expect. (hoping we can convince distributors to have the same things in their "PHP" meta packages) But that's nothing for 5.4 but for 5.5. Anybody wants to write an RFC by chance? :-) johannes