Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:66304
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.210.180 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <512E7870.7010208@lerdorf.com>
References: <435a322ccb14090d3bcf6bf8a110396d@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAH-PCH5wD99wYKxBo0mKK2QQkJe_toQP+4pB1KXCVfqCYVAoJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<512E7870.7010208@lerdorf.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 22:41:25 +0100
Message-ID: <CAH-PCH7CM4JLx4RKV71UVKL44aKYfzNn8+YsOq_yigSpZVp_VQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com>
Cc: Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com>, PHP Developers Mailing List <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0447f382cc54cb04d6bba28f
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Integrating Zend Optimizer+ into the PHP distribution
From: tyra3l@gmail.com (Ferenc Kovacs)

--f46d0447f382cc54cb04d6bba28f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:19 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com> wrote=
:

> On 02/27/2013 01:01 PM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>
> > ps: I really love what you guys did with opensourcing it, but I just
> think
> > that it is too late for 5.5 and I think that it is better to stick to t=
he
> > original roadmap, instead of having a 6 months delay just to ship the O=
+
> in
> > the core 6months earlier than the next version after 5.5 would be shipp=
ed
> > if we would have followed the yearly release plan in the first place.
>
> This is where I think we have a big disconnect. This yearly release plan
> is meaningless for most people because there is no way the current
> opcode cache situation can keep up with that. PHP 5.4 wasn't really
> released until APC was mostly stable with it which was 6+ months after
> the release. This is the most urgent thing we need to fix in the PHP
> world. Everything else in this 5.5 release is irrelevant as far as I am
> concerned and we are pushing because of an arbitrary deadline that is
> tighter than most previous releases.
>
> In order to actually get the project onto a feasible yearly release
> cycle we need to pool the few resources we do have around a single
> opcode cache implementation and push it as the one and only option as it
> will force each new shiny feature to tackle opcode support from day one
> as opposed to circling back around to it as an afterthought as has
> happened so often. And no, time has proven that this can't be done by
> having it in pecl. It didn't work for APC despite me trying to push that
> and I don't see why it would work for O+.
>
> Note that if you take the PHP 5.4 release date as the date APC started
> working reliably with it, we are well within the yearly release cycle
> and not actually late at all.
>
> -Rasmus
>

as Nikita mentioned those who can and willing to upgrade will be able to
use O+ for 5.5 even if it comes in pecl, as it is already in a good shape
for 5.5.
adding it to the core in master will also make sure that there are no
future disconnects between the new features and the opcode cache support.
we discussed this on irc previously so I'm pretty sure that we have to
agree to disagree here, as none of us seeming to change his opinion on the
matter, but I hope we can at least provide some more expressive options for
the vote.

--=20
Ferenc Kov=C3=A1cs
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu

--f46d0447f382cc54cb04d6bba28f--