Martin Scotta
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:53 PM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney > <weierophin...@php.net> wrote: > > > My point is that perhaps PHP has missed the boat a bit by moving > > everything into extensions. Perhaps if an extension is particularly > > popular, it should be incorporated into core. But let USAGE drive that, > > not the opinions of individuals on @internals. > > > I cannot disagree than with this statement. PHP is one of the language > with the most connectivity solutions, fast adoption of new > technologies, etc. Why? Because the language itself is relatively > stable while its extensions are created every day for every possible > use. > > However it seems that you forgot to consider what I said here a couple > of times already. Having one nosql extension in core won't make > hosters make the respective server side infrastructure available. How > many hosters provide firebird? DB2? Only sqlserver is part of the > standard windows offers but that's due to some different factors. > > That's why we should differentiate general purposes extensions like > pecl's http and driver like mongo. > > so why mysql ext is int core? it's as specific as mongo, isn't? It'd be very nice if some extension could be enabled just by dropping the "extension file" on the path. So developers can check what they have using phpinfo, and then upload the needed extension using ftp. Is it possible? > Cheers, > -- > Pierre > > @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >
