Hi PHP internals!
I've created an RFC for discussion:
Whether it is feasible to add pecl_http v2 to the core.
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/pecl_http
--
Regards,
Mike
Michael Wallner in php.internals (Tue, 19 Aug 2014 09:49:34 +0200):
Hi PHP internals!
I've created an RFC for discussion:
Whether it is feasible to add pecl_http v2 to the core.
Is pecl_http v2 still dependent on propro and raphf? If so, they should
be in core as well.
Jan
Michael Wallner in php.internals (Tue, 19 Aug 2014 09:49:34 +0200):
Hi PHP internals!
I've created an RFC for discussion:
Whether it is feasible to add pecl_http v2 to the core.Is pecl_http v2 still dependent on propro and raphf? If so, they should
be in core as well.
I never really understood why they are needed or why they have been
splitted off. I can imagine that other exts may need a similar thing
but...
Cheers,
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org
Is pecl_http v2 still dependent on propro and raphf? If so, they should
be in core as well.I never really understood why they are needed or why they have been
splitted off. I can imagine that other exts may need a similar thing
but...
To be reusable. pecl/raphf is also used by pecl/pq; peck/propro has not had
another use case yet, though.
--
Regards,
Mike
Is pecl_http v2 still dependent on propro and raphf? If so, they should
be in core as well.I never really understood why they are needed or why they have been
splitted off. I can imagine that other exts may need a similar thing
but...To be reusable. pecl/raphf is also used by pecl/pq; peck/propro has not had
another use case yet, though.
propo could be a spl thing, if usefull for other.
As of raphf, not sure, mixed toughts. Maybe as part of main/? I am not
sure I like to habe two other extensions for that, they are handy tho'
:)
--
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org
Is pecl_http v2 still dependent on propro and raphf? If so, they should
be in core as well.
Yes, they are mentioned in the "Open Issues" section.
--
Regards,
Mike
Hi PHP internals!
I've created an RFC for discussion:
Whether it is feasible to add pecl_http v2 to the core.
In my opinion when moving this to core the http(s):// stream should use
the same HTTP implementation so one has consistent behavior.
I also see that HTTP offers "Content type guessing [...] by building
this extension with libmagic support" I think that should based on
fileinfo so both report the same type for a file. Again consistency.
I also think the HTTP module should be forced on (like SPL or pcre) or
at least be on by default (unless --disable-[all|http] is used)
johannes
In my opinion when moving this to core the http(s):// stream should use
the same HTTP implementation so one has consistent behavior.
This would add a hard dependency on libcurl, which I'd be obviously fine
with.
I also see that HTTP offers "Content type guessing [...] by building
this extension with libmagic support" I think that should based on
fileinfo so both report the same type for a file. Again consistency.
This is from the v1-docs and was developed in a time before Fileinfo
existed.
That feature was not elevated to v2.
I also think the HTTP module should be forced on (like SPL or pcre) or
at least be on by default (unless --disable-[all|http] is used)johannes
--
Regards,
Mike
Hi PHP internals!
I've created an RFC for discussion:
Whether it is feasible to add pecl_http v2 to the core.
Just a heads up. People seem very confused because they read the docs on
php.net and don't bother to actually read the (very short) RFC, so
here's a link to the API docs of v2; you're welcome.
http://devel-m6w6.rhcloud.com/mdref/http/
--
Regards,
Mike
Hi PHP internals!
I've created an RFC for discussion:
Whether it is feasible to add pecl_http v2 to the core.
Just a minor update: the two PECL depencies have been ported to ZE3.
--
Regards,
Mike
Hi PHP internals!
I've created an RFC for discussion:
Whether it is feasible to add pecl_http v2 to the core.Just a minor update: the two PECL depencies have been ported to ZE3.
Btw, I still wonder if their features could be provided as part of php
instead of having to add 3 exts. Thoughts?
On Dec 17, 2014 5:26 PM, "Michael Wallner" <mike@php.net
mailto:mike@php.net> wrote:Just a minor update: the two PECL depencies have been ported to ZE3.
Btw, I still wonder if their features could be provided as part of php
instead of having to add 3 exts. Thoughts?
I guess we could.
pecl/propro was a replacement for the (then) disfunctional
zend_object_proxy, which seemingly has completely gone in ZE3 except a
dangling declaration in zend_objects_API.h.
pecl/raphf sort of overlaps with zend_list API, though.
--
Regards,
Mike