Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:83907 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 33205 invoked from network); 26 Feb 2015 16:35:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 26 Feb 2015 16:35:20 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=fsb@thefsb.org; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=fsb@thefsb.org; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain thefsb.org designates 67.192.241.131 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: fsb@thefsb.org X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.192.241.131 smtp131.dfw.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [67.192.241.131] ([67.192.241.131:55071] helo=smtp131.dfw.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 1F/A6-32582-74B4FE45 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 11:35:20 -0500 Received: from smtp21.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp21.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 1617930036B; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 11:35:17 -0500 (EST) Received: by smtp21.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: fsb-AT-thefsb.org) with ESMTPSA id 1C66430036A; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 11:35:15 -0500 (EST) X-Sender-Id: fsb@thefsb.org Received: from [10.0.1.2] ([UNAVAILABLE]. [73.4.147.142]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DES-CBC3-SHA) by 0.0.0.0:465 (trex/5.4.2); Thu, 26 Feb 2015 16:35:17 GMT User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.8.150116 Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 11:35:12 -0500 To: Anthony Ferrara CC: php-internals Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [PHP-DEV] crypto_something References: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] crypto_something From: fsb@thefsb.org (Tom Worster) On 2/26/15, 11:17 AM, "Anthony Ferrara" wrote: >One thing I'd like to make clear: I do not intend to target 7 with >this functionality (possibly 7.1 or later). I'd rather build a POC and >play with it for a bit. So while I do want to discuss it, I just >wanted to set expectations properly. Agreed. Not 7.0. I just think it's time to start thinking about what to do. POC would be real swell, of course.