Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
On 28.07.2008, at 14:31, Pierre Joye wrote:
hi,
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 2:26 PM, Antony Dovgal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On 28.07.2008 14:55, Pierre Joye wrote:
0.4rc1. Eitherway, if 0.4 is not coming out during alpha1 and no
support
for 0.3 is available I fear we have to move ming to PECL.
Agree, the extension is quite rarely used and it makes sense to
move it
to
PECL.
I asked that already a while back and we disagreed as it works well.
It's not about its quality or status (or did you mean that all PECL
extensions don't work well?).
This extension is rarely used and its release cycle depends on libming
releases, which makes me think that moving it to PECL isn't that bad
idea.
Frank's plan is to first add 0.4 support and then allows to build
against 0.3 (before 5.3RC or alpha2). Ming 0.4 is about to be released
(if you follow ming development list).
It happens once for 5.3, which is important enough to get major new
features.
I don't care if we move it or not, but as we agreed to do not move it
out a couple of weeks ago, it would be bad to do it now that the
changes are getting done.
So unless ming is fixed up today, I guess we have no other choice but to
disable it for alpha1. This leaves alpha2 as the last chance to get ming
fixed and reenabled. Otherwise I guess ming just has to go to PECL. Many
people seem to already be in favor of moving ming to PECL and if we have
maintenance issues, it would put the final nail in the "coffin".
To PECL men! I rather have this kind of extensions (rarely used, etc.)
in PECL _until_ they prove a) being widely used b) stable c) heavy
development has ceased.
C) is about being able to update extension _quickly_ without having to
wait for new PHP release / build whole thing all the time..
--Jani
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
