# feature request : gzip caching - Thread: https://externals.io/message/95459 - Original archive: https://news-web.php.net/php.internals/95459 - Started by Rene Veerman on 2016-08-27T16:52:48+00:00 - Messages: 25 - Reply by email to internals@lists.php.net - More for agents: search with https://externals.io/search.md?q={query} · JSON API at https://externals.io/api · documentation at https://externals.io/llms.txt --- ## #95459 — Rene Veerman — 2016-08-27T16:52:48+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95459 Hi.. First off, i love PHP. Many thanks for keeping it free too. However, i've noticed that gzipping the 1Mb of javascript that my seductiveapps.com needs, takes a relatively long time (measured over a total page load time which i'd like to bring down from it's current 10 seconds, about a second or even more is spent gzipping (by a core i5 machine)).. At one time, i spent time building PHP code that cached the already-gzipped content and outputted that with just `readfile()`.. But i never got it to work a second time, unfortunately.. Could you pretty please add this to the core of PHP? Shouldn't be that hard for the internals team right?.. Many thanks in advance for even considering to do this.. with regards, Rene Veerman, CEO + CTO of seductiveapps.com --- ## #95460 — Rene Veerman — 2016-08-27T16:54:18+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95460 · In reply to: #95459 ideally this would be an extension to readfile, add a USE_GZIP optional flags parameter to the `readfile()` request... On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 6:52 PM, Rene Veerman < rene.veerman.netherlands@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi.. > > First off, i love PHP. Many thanks for keeping it free too. > > However, i've noticed that gzipping the 1Mb of javascript that my > seductiveapps.com needs, takes a relatively long time (measured over a > total page load time which i'd like to bring down from it's current 10 > seconds, about a second or even more is spent gzipping (by a core i5 > machine)).. > > At one time, i spent time building PHP code that cached the > already-gzipped content and outputted that with just `readfile()`.. But i > never got it to work a second time, unfortunately.. > > Could you pretty please add this to the core of PHP? Shouldn't be that > hard for the internals team right?.. > > Many thanks in advance for even considering to do this.. > > with regards, > Rene Veerman, > CEO + CTO of seductiveapps.com --- ## #95461 — Rene Veerman — 2016-08-27T17:03:51+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95461 i'm working on comprehensive caching (and true obfuscation) with PHP for HTML, CSS, JS and JSON.. it's nearly done, and i've always served my javascript as a concatenated file.. i have well over 20 different sourcefiles you know.. takes too long with the http overhead for them to be in seperate requests.. the obfuscator is opensourced and will stay free to use, at https://github.com/seductiveapps/webappObfuscator which i'll update with my latest sources in a few minutes.. i'm taking comments about the thing.. i'll start a seperate thread on php-general@lists.php.org about too within half an hour or so... On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Rouven Weßling wrote: > If you're using Nginx, the gzip_static module (http://nginx.org/en/docs/ > http/ngx_http_gzip_static_module.html) is probably a better choice for > what you're trying to do. Except in exceptional circumstances you shouldn't > serve static assets through a PHP at all. > > > > > […] > gmail.com> wrote: > > […] > already-gzipped > > […] > hard > > […] --- ## #95462 — Ashley Sheridan — 2016-08-27T17:19:18+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95462 · In reply to: #95459 >Hi.. > >First off, i love PHP. Many thanks for keeping it free too. > >However, i've noticed that gzipping the 1Mb of javascript that my >seductiveapps.com needs, takes a relatively long time (measured over a >total page load time which i'd like to bring down from it's current 10 >seconds, about a second or even more is spent gzipping (by a core i5 >machine)).. Are you building the js each time it's requested? Have you thought about building it as a deployment step for production? > >At one time, i spent time building PHP code that cached the >already-gzipped >content and outputted that with just `readfile()`.. But i never got it to >work a second time, unfortunately.. > Why don't you want the web server to handle the gzip side of things? It would make more sense surely? >Could you pretty please add this to the core of PHP? Shouldn't be that >hard >for the internals team right?.. > >Many thanks in advance for even considering to do this.. > >with regards, > Rene Veerman, > CEO + CTO of seductiveapps.com -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. --- ## #95463 — Rene Veerman — 2016-08-27T17:22:13+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95463 · In reply to: #95462 eh no, i'm a big fan of caching output in js / json cache files :) but those still need to get gzipped... not just my main JS file, also my photoalbum contents -> another 1Mb of JSON content... On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 7:19 PM, Ashley Sheridan wrote: > > > On 27 August 2016 17:52:48 BST, Rene Veerman gmail.com> wrote: > > […] > > Are you building the js each time it's requested? Have you thought about > building it as a deployment step for production? > > > […] > Why don't you want the web server to handle the gzip side of things? It > would make more sense surely? > > > […] > > -- > Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. --- ## #95465 — Joshua Kehn — 2016-08-27T19:00:53+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95465 · In reply to: #95463 Why is PHP handling static file serving? This is squarely outside of it's domain. Have nginx or something upstream handle gzipping content. --jk > > > eh no, i'm a big fan of caching output in js / json cache files :) > but those still need to get gzipped... not just my main JS file, also my > photoalbum contents -> another 1Mb of JSON content... > > On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 7:19 PM, Ashley Sheridan > wrote: > > > […] --- ## #95466 — Rene Veerman — 2016-08-27T19:04:38+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95466 · In reply to: #95465 yea ok.. "something upstream".. is that nginx easy to stack above / next to / under apache2? i'm really used to apache2.. and for noobish developers it might be very convenient to add this to php `readfile()` afterall.. and my PHP handles static file serving only when needed, when evaluating content and js for specific URLs to fit in a common HTML site template for instance.. you know of a better way? i'm all ears :) > Why is PHP handling static file serving? This is squarely outside of it's > domain. Have nginx or something upstream handle gzipping content. > > --jk > > > […] > gmail.com> wrote: > > […] > ash@ashleysheridan.co.uk> > > […] --- ## #95467 — Joshua Kehn — 2016-08-27T19:36:27+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95467 · In reply to: #95466 Apache handles gzipping just fine. http://httpd.apache.org/docs/current/mod/mod_deflate.html > and my PHP handles static file serving only when needed, when evaluating content and js for specific URLs I'm not sure why that would be required. Why doesn't the HTML reference the assets required directly? > and for noobish developers it might be very convenient to add this to php `readfile()` afterall Convenient and right are often two different ways to solve a problem. I try to not offer convenient solutions that are not right. --jk > > > yea ok.. "something upstream".. is that nginx easy to stack above / next to / under apache2? i'm really used to apache2.. > and for noobish developers it might be very convenient to add this to php `readfile()` afterall.. > > and my PHP handles static file serving only when needed, when evaluating content and js for specific URLs to fit in a common HTML site template for instance.. > you know of a better way? i'm all ears :) > > > […] --- ## #95468 — Rene Veerman — 2016-08-28T00:31:50+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95468 · In reply to: #95467 > Apache handles gzipping just fine. http://httpd.apache.org/ > docs/current/mod/mod_deflate.html > > and my PHP handles static file serving only when needed, when evaluating > content and js for specific URLs > > > I'm not sure why that would be required. Why doesn't the HTML reference > the assets required directly? > that would result in *way* too many HTTP requests dude ;) i'm thinking i evaluate what URL is called up in PHP, figure out what cache files are needed (i now use multiple stages of cache files for some stuff like the main HTML template), and output a new "master cache file" that is a file that gets called up rather quickly with `readfile()` after a file_exists(translateURLtoFilesystempath($untranslatedContentURL)) to see if regeneration for any particular URL is needed.. public function translateURLtoFilesystempath ($url) { $r = $url; $r = str_replace('/','---',$r); $r = str_replace('?','-_-',$r); $r = str_replace('&','__-',$r); $r = str_replace('=','___',$r); return '--_'.$r; } public function translateFilesystempathToURL ($path) { $r = preg_replace ('#.*--_#', '', $path); $r = str_replace('---','/',$r); $r = str_replace('-_-','?',$r); $r = str_replace('__-','&',$r); $r = str_replace('___','=',$r); return $r; } > > and for noobish developers it might be very convenient to add this to php > `readfile()` afterall > > > Convenient and right are often two different ways to solve a problem. I > try to not offer convenient solutions that are not right. > yea, that's the C++ attitude ;) you do know C++ got dinosaured for a *more simple and intuitive* C# right? ;) > > --jk > > On Aug 27, 2016, at 3:04 PM, Rene Veerman gmail.com> wrote: > > yea ok.. "something upstream".. is that nginx easy to stack above / next > to / under apache2? i'm really used to apache2.. > and for noobish developers it might be very convenient to add this to php > `readfile()` afterall.. > > and my PHP handles static file serving only when needed, when evaluating > content and js for specific URLs to fit in a common HTML site template for > instance.. > you know of a better way? i'm all ears :) > > > > > […] --- ## #95469 — Ashley Sheridan — 2016-08-28T00:37:02+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95469 · In reply to: #95468 >On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 9:36 PM, Joshua Kehn >wrote: > > > […] >evaluating > > […] >reference > > […] > > >that would result in *way* too many HTTP requests dude ;) > You're doing it wrong >i'm thinking i evaluate what URL is called up in PHP, figure out what >cache What's wrong with front end evaluating what js it needs to request, like angular or react does? >files are needed (i now use multiple stages of cache files for some >stuff >like the main HTML template), and output a new "master cache file" that >is >a file that gets called up rather quickly with `readfile()` after a >file_exists(translateURLtoFilesystempath($untranslatedContentURL)) to >see >if regeneration for any particular URL is needed.. > >public function translateURLtoFilesystempath ($url) { > $r = $url; > $r = str_replace('/','---',$r); > $r = str_replace('?','-_-',$r); > $r = str_replace('&','__-',$r); > $r = str_replace('=','___',$r); > return '--_'.$r; >} >public function translateFilesystempathToURL ($path) { > $r = preg_replace ('#.*--_#', '', $path); > $r = str_replace('---','/',$r); > $r = str_replace('-_-','?',$r); > $r = str_replace('__-','&',$r); > $r = str_replace('___','=',$r); > return $r; >} > > > > > > […] >php > > […] >I > > […] > >yea, that's the C++ attitude ;) you do know C++ got dinosaured for a >*more >simple and intuitive* C# right? ;) That's not what happened at all. C++ is alive and well, C# has always served a different purpose > > > […] >next > > […] >php > > […] >evaluating > > […] >template for > > […] >wrote: > > […] >it's > > […] >also my > > […] > > […] >my > > […] >over > > […] >current 10 > > […] >core i5 > > […] >thought > > […] >got it > > […] >things? It > > […] >be that > > […] >brevity. > > […] -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. --- ## #95470 — Aziz Saleh — 2016-08-28T00:45:48+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95470 · In reply to: #95469 On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 8:37 PM, Ashley Sheridan wrote: > > > On 28 August 2016 01:31:50 BST, Rene Veerman gmail.com> wrote: > > […] > You're doing it wrong > > > […] > What's wrong with front end evaluating what js it needs to request, like > angular or react does? > > […] > > That's not what happened at all. C++ is alive and well, C# has always > served a different purpose > > > […] > > -- > Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. > > -- > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > > > Combine all of your JS to 1 file, minimize it and then serve it. After initial load it should be fine. That is how most systems I worked on with it and works fine. The browser won't have to download it multiple times (depending on user settings). 1MB of javascript is huuuuuge, I don't want to say you are doing it wrong, but something is going on. jQuery library itself is just 85kb compressed. As a developer, the way I do it is make sure that my architecture design is correct (which language/systems/etc.. to use). Once that is done for my purpose, the language usually doesn't matter. --- ## #95471 — Rene Veerman — 2016-08-28T00:50:56+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95471 · In reply to: #95470 500Kb of the JS is my framework (which does a lot, you can see it when the new encryption is done..).. another 500Kb is things like the full sourcecode for jQuery.. so thanks, i'll use the minified jQuery in the next update.. :) > > > On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 8:37 PM, Ashley Sheridan > […] > > > […] > Combine all of your JS to 1 file, minimize it and then serve it. After > initial load it should be fine. That is how most systems I worked on with > it and works fine. The browser won't have to download it multiple times > (depending on user settings). > > 1MB of javascript is huuuuuge, I don't want to say you are doing it wrong, > but something is going on. jQuery library itself is just 85kb compressed. > > As a developer, the way I do it is make sure that my architecture design > is correct (which language/systems/etc.. to use). Once that is done for my > purpose, the language usually doesn't matter. --- ## #95472 — Rene Veerman — 2016-08-28T01:26:21+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95472 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Ashley Sheridan Date: Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 3:03 AM Subject: Re: [PHP] feature request : gzip caching To: Rene Veerman Please don't top-post. Nginx was probably suggested as a lightweight web server, instead of Apache. I can't say I've ever seen both used at the same time. Any developer who is serious about their career has an understanding of how web servers work and the server caching capabilities. If they don't, I think it's fair to say they're still pretty junior and ideally would be helped by a more senior developer. I struggle to understand why you're making PHP responsible for trying to cache js files that are only requested by the front end. It feels like you're overcomplicating things somewhat. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Rene Veerman Date: Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 3:24 AM Subject: Re: [PHP] feature request : gzip caching To: Ashley Sheridan i'll top-post whenever i like.. don't tell other ppl how to format documentation / discussions, please. and to answer to your comment : i strongly disagree. it makes sense for those working on complicated webapps to limit the number of knowledge pools they must master and keep up to date.. hell, i dont even get into canvas and webgl because the knowledge domain is so large and different from *my domain*; HTML, JS, CSS, JSON.. seriously, you can not expect complicated beautiful apps to be written for browsers until you recognize that limitation on human ability.. --- ## #95473 — Aziz Saleh — 2016-08-28T01:33:35+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95473 · In reply to: #95472 On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 9:26 PM, Rene Veerman < rene.veerman.netherlands@gmail.com> wrote: > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Ashley Sheridan > Date: Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 3:03 AM > Subject: Re: [PHP] feature request : gzip caching > To: Rene Veerman > > > Please don't top-post. > > Nginx was probably suggested as a lightweight web server, instead of > Apache. I can't say I've ever seen both used at the same time. > > Any developer who is serious about their career has an understanding of how > web servers work and the server caching capabilities. If they don't, I > think it's fair to say they're still pretty junior and ideally would be > helped by a more senior developer. > > I struggle to understand why you're making PHP responsible for trying to > cache js files that are only requested by the front end. It feels like > you're overcomplicating things somewhat. > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Rene Veerman > Date: Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 3:24 AM > Subject: Re: [PHP] feature request : gzip caching > To: Ashley Sheridan > > > i'll top-post whenever i like.. don't tell other ppl how to format > documentation / discussions, please. > > and to answer to your comment : i strongly disagree. it makes sense for > those working on complicated webapps to limit the number of knowledge pools > they must master and keep up to date.. > hell, i dont even get into canvas and webgl because the knowledge domain is > so large and different from *my domain*; HTML, JS, CSS, JSON.. > seriously, you can not expect complicated beautiful apps to be written for > browsers until you recognize that limitation on human ability.. > The top post rule is a guideline for all PHP mailing lists: http://php.net/mailing-lists.php http://git.php.net/?p=php-src.git;a=blob_plain;f=README.MAILINGLIST_RULES;hb=HEAD I expect that if you minimize your entire JS file it would be around 200kb (since jQuery itself goes down from 500kb to 85kb). --- ## #95474 — Joshua Kehn — 2016-08-28T01:35:06+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95474 · In reply to: #95471 > 500Kb of the JS is my framework (which does a lot, you can see it when > the > new encryption is done..).. > another 500Kb is things like the full sourcecode for jQuery.. > so thanks, i'll use the minified jQuery in the next update.. :) Lugging around 500KB of JavaScript seems incredibly unnecessary. But if you insist on it, check out http://rollupjs.org and see how much it cuts down. --jk --- ## #95475 — Joshua Kehn — 2016-08-28T01:37:54+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95475 · In reply to: #95472 > From: Ashley Sheridan > Date: Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 3:03 AM > Subject: Re: [PHP] feature request : gzip caching > To: Rene Veerman > > > Please don't top-post. > > Nginx was probably suggested as a lightweight web server, instead of > Apache. I can't say I've ever seen both used at the same time. > > Any developer who is serious about their career has an understanding > of how > web servers work and the server caching capabilities. If they don't, I > think it's fair to say they're still pretty junior and ideally would > be > helped by a more senior developer. > > I struggle to understand why you're making PHP responsible for trying > to > cache js files that are only requested by the front end. It feels like > you're overcomplicating things somewhat. > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Rene Veerman > Date: Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 3:24 AM > Subject: Re: [PHP] feature request : gzip caching > To: Ashley Sheridan > > > i'll top-post whenever i like.. don't tell other ppl how to format > documentation / discussions, please. > > and to answer to your comment : i strongly disagree. it makes sense > for > those working on complicated webapps to limit the number of knowledge > pools > they must master and keep up to date.. > hell, i dont even get into canvas and webgl because the knowledge > domain is > so large and different from *my domain*; HTML, JS, CSS, JSON.. > seriously, you can not expect complicated beautiful apps to be written > for > browsers until you recognize that limitation on human ability.. Works on “complicated webapps” and “limits number of knowledge pools” are opposites. You need to find the right tool for the job. In this case, PHP is not the right tool. --jk --- ## #95476 — Rene Veerman — 2016-08-28T01:37:58+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95476 · In reply to: #95473 fiiine, i dont wanna get booted off the list.. ;) yea, with the long var names i use and the obfuscator knocking that down to 3 letter each.. should be sweet :) i'll probably continue on wednesday, when i've installed my new SSD.. right now runtime for obfuscation of what needs to work (my own sources and databases for my seductiveapps.com) is at an uncomfy minute to two minutes (more like two minutes actually), and i've also ordered more RAM for my dev machine.. should make the finishing touches light and easy instead of frustrating and hard.. i also worked 15 hours or so per day for the last 3 days, so i can use a rest.. disclaimer : it's done when it's done, and unexpected long development freezes *might* occur.. (it's the only way i can do what i do).. > > > On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 9:26 PM, Rene Veerman gmail.com> wrote: > > > […] > > The top post rule is a guideline for all PHP mailing lists: > > http://php.net/mailing-lists.php > http://git.php.net/?p=php-src.git;a=blob_plain;f=README. > MAILINGLIST_RULES;hb=HEAD > > I expect that if you minimize your entire JS file it would be around 200kb > (since jQuery itself goes down from 500kb to 85kb). --- ## #95477 — Rene Veerman — 2016-08-28T01:39:03+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95477 · In reply to: #95475 with all due respect, you sound like you don't know what you're talking about ok.. i rest my case at the arguments i presented, confident it'll convince the internals team (which is what this is *about*, ok).. > > > From: Ashley Sheridan ash@ashleysheridan.co.uk > Date: Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 3:03 AM > Subject: Re: [PHP] feature request : gzip caching > To: Rene Veerman rene.veerman.netherlands@gmail.com > > Please don't top-post. > > Nginx was probably suggested as a lightweight web server, instead of > Apache. I can't say I've ever seen both used at the same time. > > Any developer who is serious about their career has an understanding of how > web servers work and the server caching capabilities. If they don't, I > think it's fair to say they're still pretty junior and ideally would be > helped by a more senior developer. > > I struggle to understand why you're making PHP responsible for trying to > cache js files that are only requested by the front end. It feels like > you're overcomplicating things somewhat. > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Rene Veerman rene.veerman.netherlands@gmail.com > Date: Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 3:24 AM > Subject: Re: [PHP] feature request : gzip caching > To: Ashley Sheridan ash@ashleysheridan.co.uk > > i'll top-post whenever i like.. don't tell other ppl how to format > documentation / discussions, please. > > and to answer to your comment : i strongly disagree. it makes sense for > those working on complicated webapps to limit the number of knowledge pools > they must master and keep up to date.. > hell, i dont even get into canvas and webgl because the knowledge domain is > so large and different from *my domain*; HTML, JS, CSS, JSON.. > seriously, you can not expect complicated beautiful apps to be written for > browsers until you recognize that limitation on human ability.. > > Works on “complicated webapps” and “limits number of knowledge pools” are > opposites. You need to find the right tool for the job. In this case, PHP > is not the right tool. > > --jk --- ## #95478 — Rene Veerman — 2016-08-28T01:42:13+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95478 · In reply to: #95475 i did notice the -jk (meaning u were joking).. but i really dont appreciate trolling on subjects as fundamental (and to me at least; important), ok.. > > > From: Ashley Sheridan ash@ashleysheridan.co.uk > Date: Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 3:03 AM > Subject: Re: [PHP] feature request : gzip caching > To: Rene Veerman rene.veerman.netherlands@gmail.com > > Please don't top-post. > > Nginx was probably suggested as a lightweight web server, instead of > Apache. I can't say I've ever seen both used at the same time. > > Any developer who is serious about their career has an understanding of how > web servers work and the server caching capabilities. If they don't, I > think it's fair to say they're still pretty junior and ideally would be > helped by a more senior developer. > > I struggle to understand why you're making PHP responsible for trying to > cache js files that are only requested by the front end. It feels like > you're overcomplicating things somewhat. > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Rene Veerman rene.veerman.netherlands@gmail.com > Date: Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 3:24 AM > Subject: Re: [PHP] feature request : gzip caching > To: Ashley Sheridan ash@ashleysheridan.co.uk > > i'll top-post whenever i like.. don't tell other ppl how to format > documentation / discussions, please. > > and to answer to your comment : i strongly disagree. it makes sense for > those working on complicated webapps to limit the number of knowledge pools > they must master and keep up to date.. > hell, i dont even get into canvas and webgl because the knowledge domain is > so large and different from *my domain*; HTML, JS, CSS, JSON.. > seriously, you can not expect complicated beautiful apps to be written for > browsers until you recognize that limitation on human ability.. > > Works on “complicated webapps” and “limits number of knowledge pools” are > opposites. You need to find the right tool for the job. In this case, PHP > is not the right tool. > > --jk --- ## #95479 — Kalle Sommer Nielsen — 2016-08-28T01:52:42+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95479 · In reply to: #95478 2016-08-28 3:42 GMT+02:00 Rene Veerman : > i did notice the -jk (meaning u were joking).. but i really dont appreciate > trolling on subjects as fundamental (and to me at least; important), ok.. "JK" is his initials, "Joshua Kehn". Please be careful when posting and make sure you read over messages an extra time before hitting send. -- regards, Kalle Sommer Nielsen PHP Core Developer kalle@php.net --- ## #95480 — Rene Veerman — 2016-08-28T02:56:01+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95480 · In reply to: #95479 noted, and sorry about confusing it, but can we rest this discussion here? i dont wanna clog up the thread any further.. > 2016-08-28 3:42 GMT+02:00 Rene Veerman > […] > appreciate > > […] > > "JK" is his initials, "Joshua Kehn". Please be careful when posting > and make sure you read over messages an extra time before hitting > send. > > > > -- > regards, > > Kalle Sommer Nielsen > PHP Core Developer > kalle@php.net --- ## #95484 — German Geek — 2016-08-28T03:24:59+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95484 · In reply to: #95480 Another thing sort of related to consider is HTTP2. Instead of concatenating all scripts to one, it seems to be a much better and performant solution. See https://youtu.be/G62aCRIlONU . On Sun, 28 Aug 2016 at 14:57 Rene Veerman < rene.veerman.netherlands@gmail.com> wrote: > noted, and sorry about confusing it, but can we rest this discussion here? > i dont wanna clog up the thread any further.. > > On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 3:52 AM, Kalle Sommer Nielsen > wrote: > > > […] > rene.veerman.netherlands@gmail.com > > […] > ok.. > > […] --- ## #95488 — Joshua Kehn — 2016-08-28T04:45:54+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95488 · In reply to: #95478 > i did notice the -jk (meaning u were joking).. but i really dont > appreciate > trolling on subjects as fundamental (and to me at least; important), > ok.. > “JK” is my initials. I was not joking. However, your obvious failure to understand domain responsibility with regards to web applications is almost funny. --jk --- ## #95492 — Walter Parker — 2016-08-28T16:05:45+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95492 · In reply to: #95480 On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 7:56 PM, Rene Veerman < rene.veerman.netherlands@gmail.com> wrote: > noted, and sorry about confusing it, but can we rest this discussion here? > i dont wanna clog up the thread any further.. > > > Before you go, two observations: First, your website doesn't actually appear to work in a modern version of Chrome. Should it? Second, if you want a binding EULA on your website, you might want to check with an IP lawyer. Putting a EULA in the page source comments will not meet the conditions of contract law in most countries. To anybody knowledgeable about the field, your EULA reflects a TV show level of understanding of the law. Walter -- The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding. -- Justice Louis D. Brandeis --- ## #95493 — Aziz Saleh — 2016-08-28T16:18:19+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/95459#95493 · In reply to: #95492 > On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 7:56 PM, Rene Veerman < > rene.veerman.netherlands@gmail.com> wrote: > > > […] > here? > > […] > Before you go, two observations: > > First, your website doesn't actually appear to work in a modern version of > Chrome. Should it? > Second, if you want a binding EULA on your website, you might want to check > with an IP lawyer. > > Putting a EULA in the page source comments will not meet the conditions of > contract law in most countries. To anybody knowledgeable about the field, > your EULA reflects a TV show level of understanding of the law. > > > Walter > > -- > The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of > zeal, well-meaning but without understanding. -- Justice Louis D. > Brandeis > +1 on Windows/ Latest FF, didn't want to mention it because I assume it was still under works.