At 19:46 09/12/2002, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
Why? PHP as a shell is going to be used by only a fragment of the amount of users who use it as a CGI. In most senses, it's much more PHP than the CLI is.On Mon, 09 Dec 2002, Andi Gutmans wrote: > <ducking> > Maybe phpsh would be a good idea for the name of the CLI? It wouldn't > confuse ppl as much as php-cli > </ducking> > > I'm really not that sure it makes sense to rename the CGI from php to > php-cgi after such a long time. It's not as if we're breaking BC for the > sake of adding very much needed functionality. > > Anyway, I'm -0 for the change and +0 to find a more suitable name for the > CLI :)I am actually in favor of CLI executable being 'php'. If it's a problem on Windows, then we could possibly compromise and have the CGI version being called php.exe, but I think that it's important we keep it 'php' on UNIX.
Even though the old version was being used as a shell, it was still quite clear that it is the CGI version. And it is quite clear that the CLI version is the one that's new...
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php