As per last year, I'm still keen to continue to contribute to this. I have already implemented and solved this situation for the laravel project.
I gave my client container interop and interoperable service providers and respective config, and brought this to laravel projects This was to share code between symfony, laravel and a bespoke product, and it increased performance massively too since laravel was quite slow in its lookups until my impl. I also solved this issue with the PPI Framework project in the past, and the objective of that project was to solve these things in advance, and give them to real world clients, prior to it popping up in FIG and the wider community. As such I have the experience and drive to work on this and see it through to release. If you'd like me involved then let me know. In turn I will show up at the next get together we have (online) to talk about technical details, implementation and next steps. Just send me the invite. Many thanks, Paul On Wed, 8 Jan 2020, 19:37 Benjamin Mack, <benjamin.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi list, > > since we (TYPO3 CMS) are continuing our path in modernizing our PHP stack, > we've been looking for ways to standardize our container implementation. > While it's good to have PSR-11 for Service Containers - and we utilize this > with our latest version - we had some discussions around the actual service > providers (factories, extensions), and my _guess_ is that it was a too much > to put into PSR-11 and to tackle container PSR first, and then "at some > point" see if service provider PSR would be feasible. > > We found the service-provider package (air quotes EXPERIMENTAL, > https://github.com/container-interop/service-provider/) to be extremely > cool, but were reluctant to depend on the package, but would really love to > see such a (IMHO common) need to be provided as a PHP Standards > Recommendation. > > So, my question is: Is there an interest (either by the original PSR-11 > gang, CC or by somebody else in this list) to invest this topic further? Or > did I just miss some communication that this isn't something that is > feasible in moving forward? > > Thanks in advance for any hints and clarification! > > Benni Mack, > TYPO3 Project Lead > https://typo3.org - inspire people to share. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/F9B5D08F-3134-420F-9128-12245F919C2D%40gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/F9B5D08F-3134-420F-9128-12245F919C2D%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/CAKxcST9tYH1sRQ5QPz2NWMY%3Dp-SYcWP3mcMwoAA26hCswtRU-g%40mail.gmail.com.
