Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:64778
Return-Path: <derick@php.net>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 85956 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2013 19:35:39 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 9 Jan 2013 19:35:39 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=derick@php.net; spf=unknown; sender-id=unknown
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=derick@php.net; sender-id=unknown
Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 82.113.146.227 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: derick@php.net
X-Host-Fingerprint: 82.113.146.227 xdebug.org Linux 2.6
Received: from [82.113.146.227] ([82.113.146.227:54536] helo=xdebug.org)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id 4D/66-02684-A86CDE05 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Wed, 09 Jan 2013 14:35:39 -0500
Received: from localhost (xdebug.org [127.0.0.1])
	by xdebug.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BFF0DE13E;
	Wed,  9 Jan 2013 19:35:35 +0000 (GMT)
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 19:35:35 +0000 (GMT)
X-X-Sender: derick@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl
To: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>
cc: Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com>, Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com>, 
    "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <50EDA873.1070505@sugarcrm.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1301091935210.28951@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl>
References: <CAAyV7nGzMc+AkN1wQ5Fgj1B0AefLG2t6fKSrkE-hzpGZR=XEDw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1301091705370.28951@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl> <50EDA873.1070505@sugarcrm.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Was Reflection annotations reader - Pull APC in
 Core Already
From: derick@php.net (Derick Rethans)

On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Stas Malyshev wrote:

> > It was a plan in the past, I think we should just do it - now.
> 
> If you mean moving the directory from pecl to ext/ - that's fine as 
> long as maintainers commit to keeping it in shape (last time, I 
> remember, 5.4 support was lagging). If you mean more tight integration 
> - see my previous email why I think it would be a bad idea.

I meant in ext/

cheers,
Derick