On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 09:55, Ferenc Kovacs <tyr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 9:44 AM, Hannes Magnusson > <hannes.magnus...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 01:19, Jakub Vrana <vr...@php.net> wrote: >>> There are already another extensions not available via php.net documented in >>> the PHP Manual (sqlsrv and pdo_sqlsrv). So I didn't know that it is a >>> requirement. I'm sorry for the guerilla approach but I really didn't suppose >>> that it will be a problem. >> >> Both of them have pecl packages and available via php.net. >> >> >>> Suhosin is still very relevant today because it is a part of PHP package in >>> some Linux distributions. And people are asking questions like: >> >> I do somewhat agree with you, but if the author doesn't want to be >> involved with php.net then there is very little we can (nor should) do >> about it. >> If the distros are messing with PHP then they (following our license) >> cannot call it PHP anymore, and should warn people about that fact and >> ensure their users understand the consciences. >> > > imo almost every distro has some patches (apart from suhosin), isn't > that the same violation? > it would seem weird if we start a witch-hunt for suhosin only.
We don't document those patches either. Weather they change default ini values, unbundle extensions, change argument order, or whatever distros modifications are done.. we don't document them. We document the product of php.net, nothing more. If/When these things become part of php.net we should document them. In many cases these authors simply don't want docs on it on php.net, in other cases php.net does not want to support it... whatever the reason is, we should not be documenting things outside the php.net domain. -Hannes
