You're right, a cursory Google search reveals that someone is maintaining a php5-nacl package that uses libsodium. This simplifies instructions greatly! :D On Jan 9, 2015 6:11 AM, "Johannes Schlüter" <johan...@schlueters.de> wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-01-02 at 12:05 -0500, Scott Arciszewski wrote: > > Right now, the libsodium PECL package is in the beta channel. Would it be > > possible to include libsodium as a core extension in PHP 7? If so, what > > hurdles would need to be cleared before that happens? > > This should be an FAQ, maybe somebody can put it on the wiki or > somewhere: > > For most users it doesn't matter if an extension is bundled or > distributed via PECL. Once Linux/Unix distributors get a hand on it they > package it as an independent package, independently from being in core > or not and the user has to install the "phpX-foo" package. For Windows > this is similar - most extensions are provided as dll which has to be > activated. The only once for whom this is a notable difference are the > ones who build PHP themselves, but for them it shouldn't be a big > hurdle. > > Having it in PECL means that it simplifies PHP release process (one less > moving piece) and the maintainers are more flexible in regards to > evolving the extension API by not being bound to PHP's stricter BC > rules. > > By being bundled (in theory) it gets more eyes looking at it (while we > have enough bundled extensions which receive barely attention as a > counter-prove) > > It has to be bundled if we want to force it on all users (we hardly do > that) or some other core components depend on it. > > In my personal opinion we should continue moving stuff out instead of > in. > > johannes > > >
