+1 s, Switch to a new opcode cacher is much easier than update PHP,  
and ZO+ is already compatible with <5.5. we could use ZO+ as soon as possible.
--  
reeze | reeze.cn

已使用 Sparrow (http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig)  

在 2013年3月2日星期六,下午4:43,Ferenc Kovacs 写道:

> On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Zeev Suraski <z...@zend.com 
> (mailto:z...@zend.com)> wrote:
>  
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Ferenc Kovacs [mailto:tyr...@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2013 10:15 AM
> > > To: Pierre Joye; Dmitry Stogov
> > > Cc: Christopher Jones; Matt Ficken; internals@lists.php.net 
> > > (mailto:internals@lists.php.net)
> > > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Current Status of O+ on Windows
> > >  
> > > > > Did you experiment with any options?
> > > > > Putting the date of your O+ snapshot would also be handy.
> > > > >  
> > > >  
> > > >  
> > > > Latest from here are used:
> > > > http://windows.php.net/downloads/pecl/snaps/Optimizer/7.0.0-dev/
> > > >  
> > > > Dates are included. It would be nice to have it in the report as well,
> > > > but we always use latest revision. It would however be much easier if
> > > > there were PECL releases.
> > > >  
> > >  
> > > +1
> > > Dmitry, is there any objection against creating a pecl release?
> > > Could you tag the first version?
> > >  
> >  
> >  
> > The current vote that's going on right now deals with putting the extension
> > into PHP itself. If that happens (which seems awfully likely at this
> > point), why do we need it in PECL? We'd very much rather invest our very
> > limited cycles into the code itself. We're probably roughly a week away
> > from having builds as a part of the PHP 5.5 snaps.
> >  
> > Zeev
>  
> I see.
> so no O+ for <5.5?
> having a pecl release would be a small amount of work, which I would glad
> to help with.
>  
> --  
> Ferenc Kovács
> @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
>  
>  


Reply via email to