Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:60335
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.160.170 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4F9AE82C.8080006@sugarcrm.com>
References: <CAEZPtU6k00t4QLdoUEg5VBJNADO2u1bk0rnkvsa0oyjke8w5vg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F9ADBB1.1040006@sugarcrm.com>
	<CAEZPtU6U8YgHTmCbyRb6D_Vmt8t9WWD0CA+HboqMURHSf130=Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F9AE82C.8080006@sugarcrm.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 20:51:43 +0200
Message-ID: <CAEZPtU4O7f4UB8CNYmPwLsturdZ7+VvRVcPjoQ7kx_P-Jd9dig@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] considering to remove ext/imap from master
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye)

hi!

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:40 PM, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com> wro=
te:

> Alternative means rewriting all the code. On top of framework previously
> not used in the project, with different APIs, different approach to
> IMAP, etc. This is a large piece of work, for many projects - totally
> unnecessary as ext/imap work for them right now.

I think you over estimate the complexity to move something to a clean,
maintained, user friendly API from a over complex, buggy and
unmaintained extension and library (which can kill requests under
certain circumstances too).

> That provided the person in question actually owns the code, not just
> runs the app. In the latter case he has no options to upgrade at all.

Again, 2015! That's not now, not tomorrow but 2015!

>> Yes, many (see the bugs DB). And c-client is as dead as msql.
>
> Bug DB is full of bugs for everything, not a reason to drop imap. As for
> "less work", I don't see how much less work can be done on imap that is
> done now. If it still works for people, why remove it? I see =A0no reason
> to do this.

if totally dead and not secure c-client is not a good reason, then I
have no idea what a good reason is :), and again, we are saying: "Heh,
I know you are busy like hell, but we are going to kill imap support
in 2015, and some distros will maintain 5.4 for a couple of years
longer too, so you should have enough time to migrate the little code
taking care of imap".

And why do I say "little code"? Because anyone making anything serious
(except basic reading ops) with imap already migrated to alternatives
or wrote its own implementation.

Cheers,
--=20
Pierre

@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org