Hi all,
(Cross-posting to PECL and Internals lists, because I'm not sure which
will reach the best audience.)
As you may be aware, PECL contains two extensions for connecting to
memcache: one called "memcache", and one called "memcached". This has
always been a great source of confusion, particularly because their
introductions in the manual [1][2], don't even acknowledge the existence
of the other, let alone explain why you'd choose one or the other.
However, it seems that the package without a d is actually abandoned.
The official PECL package was last released more than 5 years ago [3],
and the bug asking for PHP 7 compatibility is still open [4]. An
unofficial fork apparently supports PHP 7 [5] but it in turn hasn't had
a commit in 11 months, and has an open bug for 7.2 compatibility [6].
The package with a d, on the other hand, appears at a glance to be
actively maintained, and would seem to be the right choice for any user
writing new code.
How can we make this more useful?
- Is there any difference, other than API design, between the two
packages, which would merit seeking a new maintainer for memcache
(without a d)?
- If not, should the package be officially marked "abandoned" or
"deprecated" in PECL, and in the PHP manual?
- Either way, should the manual for memcache (without a d) direct users
to use memcached (with a d) for all new code? If not, what advice should
it give?
Thank you for any pointers or opinions!
References:
[1]: http://php.net/manual/en/intro.memcache.php
[2]: http://php.net/manual/en/intro.memcached.php
[3]: https://pecl.php.net/package/memcache
[4]: https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=72887
[5]: https://github.com/websupport-sk/pecl-memcache
[6]: https://github.com/websupport-sk/pecl-memcache/issues/28
[For those who don't get the joke in the subject line:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomson_and_Thompson]
Regards,
--
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]
--
PECL development discussion Mailing List (http://pecl.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php