Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:70462
Return-Path: <mike.php.net@gmail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 57750 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2013 07:31:54 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 2 Dec 2013 07:31:54 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=mike.php.net@gmail.com; sender-id=pass
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=mike.php.net@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.170 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: mike.php.net@gmail.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.215.170 mail-ea0-f170.google.com  
Received: from [209.85.215.170] ([209.85.215.170:58978] helo=mail-ea0-f170.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id FA/D0-52529-9673C925 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Mon, 02 Dec 2013 02:31:54 -0500
Received: by mail-ea0-f170.google.com with SMTP id k10so8653437eaj.15
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Sun, 01 Dec 2013 23:31:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references
         :content-type:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=2PqIVIHdLax14H93A/XuAXCyud42PsIIwcYmNXfPxm4=;
        b=W7uENptwkBOOnbJUteJauayjd8bw7Da6mz6W5OOSKp7PrFOK1lCYoAoopQCvSj48lR
         4dKNMB4txz+6lDvgyw9pgYlVjzMJYSalTEZP4GnLxucdSewldOk457ooe46so6mzTPlB
         GmDBEC7jIwpTs7uhsHgMX109xVrBau5jwX4kjd7Hm/4JJo+N1/cLukuQvLtA3AXqRMHF
         5nH5+tpheVZ1Vq0Ae1dSa/gAbzrvQT8thclxsbxqOACSHc+Ck0CWq5fKeRa7I+0c0uUv
         CyTtGvKIHuT26mEMXuGIV8ZVGSfuY1jPioghDWbdJ9nClzThfhkQlJjF1DoZRUh7XGZi
         pA2w==
X-Received: by 10.14.178.132 with SMTP id f4mr1544eem.146.1385969510643;
        Sun, 01 Dec 2013 23:31:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.120] (178-18-170-101.customer.bnet.at. [178.18.170.101])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id o47sm68067025eem.21.2013.12.01.23.31.49
        for <multiple recipients>
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Sun, 01 Dec 2013 23:31:49 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <1385969508.2637.3.camel@smugmug>
To: Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com>
Cc: Julien Pauli <jpauli@php.net>, Adam Harvey <aharvey@php.net>, Yasuo
 Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net>, "internals@lists.php.net"
 <internals@lists.php.net>,  Michael Wallner <mike@php.net>, Ryan McCue
 <lists@rotorised.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2013 08:31:48 +0100
In-Reply-To: <CAH-PCH5uNgdNMVF1yY8gLUAebyS_zcQF1VFM5Bi5KqqhTmsMYw@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
	<CALJZF3hPY01c9EoVg3HYZec8TzuKwNkxZQvE58mtwh-WouUJfQ@mail.gmail.com>
	 <CAH-PCH6PQoeEvFh=7+4h8dMKST0kYjAG6aHQCXV4wLdz0y47yg@mail.gmail.com>
	 <CALJZF3ipd-Rxa5aiewVCJSgkss3c7N9YJhPXYWyF9T3e0jr8mg@mail.gmail.com>
	 <5293E54F.9060604@rotorised.com>
	 <CAH-PCH78NAKrOB8q9t9oW3V-+UMrHmEqsXbVucA3UZ2=N3FKjg@mail.gmail.com>
	 <CALJZF3ihrvfUoMkDp_b6gHSuSe8R6QwKVxbPkveMRb9R8moNHQ@mail.gmail.com>
	 <CAH-PCH55JDUOgAZ0GPz8aCiRAoJKqpVjNeo4dvmTTxk095Ra1Q@mail.gmail.com>
	 <CALJZF3iRhvm-6vJi1v+Hu4bFtbTi4Y4iwA7+HcQ0HZgd90gsHw@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1385628146.16543.0.camel@smugmug>
	 <CAH-PCH5uNgdNMVF1yY8gLUAebyS_zcQF1VFM5Bi5KqqhTmsMYw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.2 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Slim POST data (was: PHP-5.6 and
 $HTTP_RAW_POST_DATA)
From: mike.php.net@gmail.com (Mike)

On Thu, 2013-11-28 at 10:00 +0100, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:

> 
> Hi Mike,
> 
> I think it would be nice to either reconstruct or split the RFC.
> Currently it is a bit hard to tell, that what is changed in which
> version.

I changed to RFC to be easier comprehensible (hopefully).

> I think it would make sense, to have an RFC for 5.6 about introducing
> the new stream, the new ini option and and how does it keeps userland
> BC while providing a way to opt-in for the performance gain, and that
> it introduces an E_DEPRECATED so we can remove the ini and the raw
> post global variable in the next major version.

I think we cannot add E_DEPRECATED to the INI-setting unless we make its
default -1... which breaks BC :p

Also, I think two RFCs would be quite much, but I already gave up my
renitency.


-- 
Regards,
Mike