On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Ruslan Osmanov <rrosma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Ruslan Osmanov wrote: > > > > Hi. > > > > I've finished writing libevent-2-compatible version of "event" > > extension. I guess, there is no need to introduce libevent itself. We > > had a conversation regarding the ext. here: > > > > > http://old.nabble.com/Is-%22event%22-extension-still-maintained--Or-what-about-libevent-2--to34851097.html > > > > The code is well tested on real application under (artificial) high > > load. It covers libevent core, DNS base, evbuffers, bufferevents, HTTP > > and connection listener. There are still some features to add: some > > functions to handle http and buffers, RPC and SSL. > > > > I'd like to obtain the rights to publish this as a new beta release of > > "event" extension. > > > > The code hosted on bitbucket: > > https://bitbucket.org/osmanov/pecl-event/overview > > > > Wez, could you give me access to it? > > > > Recently I've implemented SSL bufferevents, fixed some bugs on different > platforms ... > > What would you suggest, to upload the next extension for libevent (thus, > "event", "libevent" and, say, "event2" become competing extensions), or > rather > to wait for someone who can give me rights to change current "event" > extension? > > Hi, based on the current and previous discussion (where the author of event - Wez - agreed that both event and libevent are unmaintained and would make sense to somebody take it over) I think it would be safe to assign you to the event extension as a lead. any objections? -- Ferenc Kovács @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
