2010/4/15 Christopher Jones <christopher.jo...@oracle.com>: > > > On 04/13/2010 12:01 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote: >> >> At 21:46 13/04/2010, Christopher Jones wrote: >> >> >>> Jérôme Loyet wrote: >>>> >>>> Le 13 avril 2010 20:17, Christopher Jones >>>> <christopher.jo...@oracle.com> a écrit : >>>>> >>>>> Jérôme Loyet wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi guys, >>>>>> >>>>>> As dreamcast4 advises me in the previous FPM conversation, I just >>>>>> wrote the RFC for the FPM INI syntax. >>>>>> >>>>>> It can be read here: http://wiki.php.net/rfc/fpm/ini_syntax >>>>>> >>>>>> Tell me what you think. >>>>>> >>>>>> ++ Jerome >>>>> >>>>> I think the RFC should clearly state what is new generic php.ini >>>>> functionality (e.g. include) and what is specific for FPM. >>>> >>>> for me everything is specific to FPM >>> >>> How is "include" specific to FPM? >> >> What he means is that it'll be implemented in the custom code >> responsible for parsing fpm.ini, and not in the ZE .ini parser which >> would be the layer below it. Implementing include() can be done at >> either layer. If it's implemented at the bottom layer (ZE) then it'll >> transparently effect any and all .ini's - not sure we want that (maybe). >> If we implement it at the top layer - the custom code that's responsible >> for fpm.ini, then it will be entirely specific to it and won't effect >> php.ini behavior in any way (exactly like the support for the >> 'extension' keyword is implemented for php.ini, but not for any other >> .ini's - because it's at the top custom-code layer). >> >> Zeev >> > > Thanks Zeev. Jérôme should add this clarification to the RFC. >
already done. ++ jerome -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
