Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:73279
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain devilix.net designates 209.85.160.169 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAGa2bXYP0dbB15q5z+_MfV4-XjCmWJTg11YxO-wC4hQCkq24BA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPhkiZw5xWRkc=ofh-nB5ZkjfThZFkH_+pK5RZaQFLKhno7u7A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGa2bXZiBuw_L_ehvTZb5_UUedtbS0n4GXYUjtKix0S9DX_8KQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<5324FE40.1070704@sugarcrm.com>
	<CAPhkiZy1oG_WHijMknB34dyo0aZRDU89EBafpaEGqGM32DCK0A@mail.gmail.com>
	<532603A0.8060802@sugarcrm.com>
	<CAPhkiZxdrxiKT3cTW9ra=0aFDKKP3-OpjmGdxqzHxu8YEUK2ww@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGa2bXbH8WFp=8C-ON-1aAHLiyTsemVKMH+dGnqBSJAw5zw-GA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPhkiZx52CiKkk385itjEtg99ox3PHzXga9ZWDPbWiB2wRyH4g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGa2bXZGun=khdMZHzYoERap7qj7bQDPEfQzx2jJ2MwPs7-p_g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPhkiZzmzTqPR4KynBCWijvHa=TGKzTni7JdfuuKdy_i=sBeQg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGa2bXb6k8NYyYheCM6dvFWj-jA2GLP7ZiusTgZK-YgkNkeHhQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPhkiZz-_PxvfsCiMDm8Hf9YzVNV+Ch1zpqDut19uV1w1WCWoA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGa2bXb45BizZ8g8zzdneV_27R7zgiX34xoZm+f8YyNQrZxdTQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPhkiZxi0UxrrUMRNUFDmkzs2pX6y81PPabzLjLF-ChboaB8jg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGa2bXYajPoD6D34nPXvja-Xz+pc3bCwPi6f7U-5iA3=Z75h-w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5327DD6E.6030402@sugarcrm.com>
	<CAGa2bXZk1BhfM4Ze9_+XDpJshGeKi==sYTXJ=_76oCJr=r75SQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPhkiZzE4PxOEzynQvCAquqtJ5Roajzb9GbHUb=a=rbxKTh+hA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGa2bXYP0dbB15q5z+_MfV4-XjCmWJTg11YxO-wC4hQCkq24BA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 01:27:33 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPhkiZz_dQLP-J2Z7iS+yrFWc8DmejSGRkVUEyfq9qsgCkmcuw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net>
Cc: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>, 
	"internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Revert/extend/postpone original RFC about
 read_only, lazy_write sessions
From: narf@devilix.net (Andrey Andreev)

On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 1:04 AM, Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Andrey Andreev <narf@devilix.net> wrote:
>>
>> Exacly why I wrote an RFC, except Yasuo already explained that current
>> workflows (speaking of userland handlers) are not affected and BC is
>> maintaned.
>
>
> I found issue with object based save handlers, but it was solved without any
> BC.
>
> I also added createSid() method support. If both create_sid() and
> createSid() exists,
> createSid() is used.

I thought this was currently in discussion, and in a separate thread?

>> > How about making it a INI option? It makes session_start() option
>> > handling
>> > code
>> > a little simpler. It's not mandatory, though.
>>
>> +1 from me, if it is to be kept as an option.
>
>
> I'm about to modify patch to make it INI. No objections for this?

Well, I said 'if' we keep it as an option at all. I'd rather update
the RFC to propose it as non-optional behavior since there are no
downsides from it, as I understand.

>> > I think we are better to have another SessionHandler object that support
>> > new
>> > APIs.
>> > We can handle create_sid() method rename with new object also. We may
>> > keep
>> > current implementation undocumented and may document it new one
>> > (createSid()) only.
>> > I will name it "SessionUpdateTimestampHandler". If anyone has
>> > suggestions,
>> > I would appreciate it.
>>
>> I object, although it should've been called SessionFilesHandler in the
>> first place, that way we could also have SessionMemcacheHandler,
>> SessionWhateverHandler - way nicer than it currently is, but again -
>> not the point of this discussion.
>
>
> I removed new object. It's not needed anymore, since I prevented bogus
> methods
> registration.

Bogus methods? I wrote this RFC because it was completely unclear how
certain situations would be handled ... now this is also unclear. :)
I sent you a private e-mail earlier today, perhaps you could explain
me that in a reply to it so that we don't spam the list.

Cheers,
Andrey.