On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Anthony Ferrara <ircmax...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Pierre et al, > > I would prefer to have it in pecl and merge once ready/cleaned up. > > Yes, same idea than with APC, except that it could be faster (for what > > I read, waiting to see the sources). Also we can review and do the > > changes more easily. > > > Well, I think the one issue with doing it in PECL first is that it prevents > some deeper engine integration that could benefit the implementation > significantly. > > With that said, I think it's a bit too tight to try to merge this in for > the 5.5 beta freeze. Given the current RFC process requires a minimum of 2 > weeks (1 of comments and 1 of voting), it feels tight. I'm not saying that > I think we should stick to the numbers hard in this particular case, but > it's also not a trivial patch, and I feel that rushing wouldn't be the > best idea. > > So with that said, may I suggest that we add 1 more round of Alpha to the > 5.5 release cycle, with the specific intent of merging this in (assuming > the implementation goes well). So we'd be talking about adding > approximately 2 weeks to the cycle, but it would ease the time and > implementation pressures that could otherwise cause issues. I think this > feature is worth pushing 5.5 back slightly, but at the same time not > delaying it indefinitely until this gets in. So if in 4 weeks (the time > until the beta, under this strategy) this isn't ready, it wouldn't make > 5.5. But at the same time it gives us enough time to implement it, > understand the implementation and make a decision that's based on a > concrete implementation than an "in-progress" one. > > Thoughts? > I'm ok with that, that's safe and clean :) Julien.P
