Re: [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

From: Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 11:40:50 +0000
Subject: Re: [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http
References: 1  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to [email protected] to get a copy of this message
Hi Mike,

> On 29 Jan 2015, at 11:14, Michael Wallner <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> I’ve rewritten the RFC for pecl_http and hopefully addressed most of the things mentioned
> previously.
> 
> I you still find anything lacking, please let me know, so I can expand the RFC accordingly.

The RFC is an improvement in that it covers more of *what* pecl/http is, but it still doesn’t
answer the most important question: why? It still doesn’t answer any of the following key
questions:

* Why do we need pecl/http?
  * Why should pecl/http be merged into PHP core?
  * Why should pecl/http be enabled by default?
  * Why should we have our own HTTP API and not follow PSR-7?
  * What does it offer over PHP’s existing HTTP capabilities?
  * Why should we merge this rather than, say, filling in gaps in PHP’s HTTP capabilities?

So, I think the RFC is still rather lacking. The Features section isn’t really any better than
before, either. It only gives a sentence or two to each module, which isn’t terribly informative.
Each module probably needs its own rationale, and a comparison to PHP’s existing facilities, as
well.

Thanks.

--
Andrea Faulds
http://ajf.me/






Thread (55 messages)

« previous php.internals (#81373) next »