On 03/23/2010 11:31 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote: > It's not clear at all. In fact I think it was very clear that using > php.ini syntax (together with sections if necessary) is very much an > option, and I think mostly everyone here leaned towards it.
Just take a look at it: http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/branches/PHP_5_3_FPM/sapi/fpm/php-fpm.conf.in?revision=292487&view=markup How do you propose to describe the same set of options using php.ini syntax? Yes, simple things like "value=Yes/No" or "value=DIR" fit just fine into php.ini. But how would decribe a set of pools each with its own set of options? (taking into account that some of these options may override global options) Last time I heard it was proposed to use copy/paste to add 'global' options to each pool =) > By using syntax we're using everywhere else for configuration, > instead of introducing a brand new one. This is not a php.ini, this is a different config file for a different service. You don't expect Apache to switch to php.ini syntax just because it's nice and familiar, do you? > .ini is also easier than XML for mere mortals. Now I was never an XML fan myself, but I think THIS particular XML config file is even easier to read and understand than php.ini. -- Wbr, Antony Dovgal --- http://pinba.org - realtime statistics for PHP -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
