RE: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
This statement demonstrates a lack of understanding on your part. PHP is free. Completely free. It costs nothing. Nada, zilch, zero. It is not owned by any company or induhvidual. There are acknowledged leaders in the community. Did a worker from Zend just say that if there is going to be an encoder in it, Zend will draw all of their support from PHP? I think so. Zend does not control PHP. Zend has just invested a lot in the technology. A good investment. Right now there are several encoders available from other sources and it is up to each induhvidual/team/organization to decide a. do we need to encode? and 2. which encoder do we want to use? Just like you can choose to use MMTurke or Zend Encoder or another encoder. I have said a few times that it is not easy enough for shrink wrap software vendors to demand that there should be an outside encoder installed along the product. What is so hard to understand about this? Which part exactly? JS _ MSN Messenger - kaikki ystävät klikkauksen päässä! Lataa tästä ilmaiseksi. http://www.msn.fi/viestintapalvelut/Messenger -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
Not at all. If enough decide to include some other encoding engine in PHP then Zend can happily withdraw all of their support from PHP, perhaps making a new product called zPHP or such, and the PHP camp is not controlled in any way. It seems a bit extreme and probably not worth it, but no materially different from supporting (insert your favorite and my least favorite cause here) and watching us part ways. Just my last comment (probably) on this and then I stop, I think I don't have anything more say: Yes, I think it would be a good idea to make *PHP free*. IMHO, one company has now too much control in it, it's not good for the language in general. Unless, of course, you are willing to put the encoding feature into PHP core by default. JS -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
[snip] Yes, I think it would be a good idea to make *PHP free*. IMHO, one company has now too much control in it, it's not good for the language in general. Unless, of course, you are willing to put the encoding feature into PHP core by default. [/snip] This statement demonstrates a lack of understanding on your part. PHP is free. Completely free. It costs nothing. Nada, zilch, zero. It is not owned by any company or induhvidual. There are acknowledged leaders in the community. Zend does not control PHP. Zend has just invested a lot in the technology. If PHP went away tomorrow Zend would focus their core on something else. Likewise if Zend went away tomorrow PHP would continue to grow and evolve. Putting an encoding feature into the core of PHP would require actions by those developing PHP, which you can take part in. Right now there are several encoders available from other sources and it is up to each induhvidual/team/organization to decide a. do we need to encode? and 2. which encoder do we want to use? Just like you can choose to use MMTurke or Zend Encoder or another encoder. What is so hard to understand about this? -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
Zend will never include a free encoder/accelerator into php by default. What I am waiting for is Turck MMCache to offer a download of a file like php-4.3.4.tar.gz with Turck included. So when I need to upgrade php, I would go download a new version of php from Turck instead of php.net. What I want to know is ... Turck MMCache is open source and php is open source so how hard is it to create that? -Original Message- From: David T-G [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: November 16, 2003 7:23 PM To: PHP General list Cc: John Smith Subject: Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution? John, et al -- ...and then John Smith said... % % I was not saying or implying that Zend controls PHP alone. In practice % they have the knife and the cheese in their hands, meaning currently % PHP programs depend on Zend Engine to run. Maybe when somebody develops % real PHP compilers things will be different. % % I know that you were not implying it, I just wanted to make my point. Fair enough. % % In practice it seems that Zend has the final say on PHP, and I think it's % bad for the language. Not at all. If enough decide to include some other encoding engine in PHP then Zend can happily withdraw all of their support from PHP, perhaps making a new product called zPHP or such, and the PHP camp is not controlled in any way. It seems a bit extreme and probably not worth it, but no materially different from supporting (insert your favorite and my least favorite cause here) and watching us part ways. % % JS I think that supporting this discussion any further might cause some others to part ways with this list, so let's be done here :-) HTH HAND :-D -- David T-G * There is too much animal courage in (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * society and not sufficient moral courage. (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Mary Baker Eddy, Science and Health http://justpickone.org/davidtg/ Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
Hello, On 11/17/2003 05:17 AM, Michael wrote: Zend will never include a free encoder/accelerator into php by default. What I am waiting for is Turck MMCache to offer a download of a file like php-4.3.4.tar.gz with Turck included. So when I need to upgrade php, I would go download a new version of php from Turck instead of php.net. What I want to know is ... Turck MMCache is open source and php is open source so how hard is it to create that? No. It is very simple. Turck MMCache is a shared library extension. You just need to drop the shared library (.so or .DLL) file in your PHP extensions directory and enable it in php.ini . -- Regards, Manuel Lemos Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP http://www.phpclasses.org/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
I've tried installing it but I need MS Visual Studio C++ so they have to make it even easier. Windows Installation Notes == To build Turck MMCache on Windows platform you will need MS Visual Studio C++ 6.0. Step 1. Compiling Turck MMCache - Unpack php sources. - Put mmcache sources under ext/mmcache. - Put php4ts.lib into ext/mmcache. - Copy main/config.w32.h.in into main/config.w32.h. - Open project file ext/mmcache/mmcache.dsp. - Select release configuration and build mmcache.dll. Step 2. Installing Turck MMCache Copy mmcache.dll into your PHP extension folder. Step 3. Configuring Turck MMCache Add the following lines into your php.ini file (usually c:\winnt\php.ini) -Original Message- From: Manuel Lemos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: November 17, 2003 2:31 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution? Hello, On 11/17/2003 05:17 AM, Michael wrote: Zend will never include a free encoder/accelerator into php by default. What I am waiting for is Turck MMCache to offer a download of a file like php-4.3.4.tar.gz with Turck included. So when I need to upgrade php, I would go download a new version of php from Turck instead of php.net. What I want to know is ... Turck MMCache is open source and php is open source so how hard is it to create that? No. It is very simple. Turck MMCache is a shared library extension. You just need to drop the shared library (.so or .DLL) file in your PHP extensions directory and enable it in php.ini . -- Regards, Manuel Lemos Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP http://www.phpclasses.org/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
Michael -- ...and then Michael said... % % I've tried installing it but I need MS Visual Studio C++ so they have to % make it even easier. It's easier already: abandon Windows for some *NIX system ;-) I hate to sound like a curmudgeon, but if you want this then you should build it, just like John anyone else who wants it should. No, I haven't looked at either (I don't even know what an encoder does; I *think* that it could be a precompiler or an obfuscator but don't really care), but neither can be impossible to build and so you can have it without worry of politics -- or you could write your own in something other than VS C++ or get a different one or... HAND :-D -- David T-G * There is too much animal courage in (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * society and not sufficient moral courage. (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Mary Baker Eddy, Science and Health http://justpickone.org/davidtg/ Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
David T-G wrote: ...and then Michael said... I've tried installing it but I need MS Visual Studio C++ so they have to make it even easier. I hate to sound like a curmudgeon, but if you want this then you should build it, just like John anyone else who wants it should. That's not really the issue here. Sure, anyone can build it for their own server. That's all well and good. But try distributing a script that's dependent upon it and telling your clients that they must also install it, or get their ISP to install it. That's the PITA part. -- ---John Holmes... Amazon Wishlist: www.amazon.com/o/registry/3BEXC84AB3A5E/ php|architect: The Magazine for PHP Professionals www.phparch.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
Hello, On 11/17/2003 06:57 AM, Michael wrote: I've tried installing it but I need MS Visual Studio C++ so they have to make it even easier. Yes, you are right for those that want to build it from source on Windows, having to buy MSVC++ may be a drag. I think I saw somewhere that there is a build to build it with CygWin though. Anyway, the Turck author provides already built extensions DLL for the latest PHP versions. So you really do not have build it yourself. http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=69426 -- Regards, Manuel Lemos Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP http://www.phpclasses.org/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
[snip] In practice it seems that Zend has the final say on PHP, and I think it's bad for the language. [/snip] That is just plain incorrect. If there were a final arbiter PHP would cease to be truly open source, and I think the folks on the PHP-DEV list would be quick to correct you. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
David T-G says I hate to sound like a curmudgeon, but if you want this then you should build it, just like John anyone else who wants it should. No, I haven't looked at either (I don't even know what an encoder does; I *think* that it could be a precompiler or an obfuscator but don't really care), but neither can be impossible to build and so you can have it without worry of politics -- or you could write your own in something other than VS C++ or get a different one or... 1. An obsfuscator scrambles all the variable, function and class names 2. An encoder stores your source in compiled form whatever that looks like 3. An accelerator speeds up the php scripts by 1 to 10 times Option 1 and 2 are debateable whether it should be included in php. Option 3 is a no brainer that it should be included. Why don't I make my own? I don't know how. Should I learn and do it? No because there's already an open source encoder and accelerator. Why do redundant work? -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
* Thus wrote Michael ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): I've tried installing it but I need MS Visual Studio C++ so they have to make it even easier. There is a compiled version on the website for windows. Go to the download section and you'll see that they have it available for multiple version of php there. Curt -- My PHP key is worn out PHP List stats since 1997: http://zirzow.dyndns.org/html/mlists/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
Michael, et al -- ...and then Michael said... % % David T-G says % I hate to sound like a curmudgeon, but if you want this then you should % build it, just like John anyone else who wants it should. No, I haven't ... % % 1. An obsfuscator scrambles all the variable, function and class names % 2. An encoder stores your source in compiled form whatever that looks like % 3. An accelerator speeds up the php scripts by 1 to 10 times Thanks. Very helpful. % % Option 1 and 2 are debateable whether it should be included in php. Option % 3 is a no brainer that it should be included. One would think, but not necessarily; 1) there might be other accelerators out there and 2) it's more for the maintainers to have to keep up to date and bug-free. Maybe, just maybe, php should stay very slim and in The Unix Way any addons remain separate and not-required addons. [I'm used to seeing this sort of argument about mutt's code and featureset, and so I tend to make these counterarguments.] % % Why don't I make my own? I don't know how. Should I learn and do it? No Neither do I. Someone obviously does, though, which is a nice start. % because there's already an open source encoder and accelerator. Why do % redundant work? But the point is that your wish to have it would force that upon those who write and maintain the php code. If you want it, then at the very least put together the pieces to make it happen for a stock tarball so that someone can download your contributed patch/enhancement and include it in the build. If enough people want some item included, then they mmight or might not be able to convince the code maintainers to include that piece, and can always fall back to making a patch to the source tarball and/or even making a very-similar-but-yet-completely-independent product. HTH HAND thanks again :-D -- David T-G * There is too much animal courage in (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * society and not sufficient moral courage. (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Mary Baker Eddy, Science and Health http://justpickone.org/davidtg/ Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
Oh my god thanks Curt! I don't know when they added that in for windows but now my scripts are flying. My scripts are pretty bloated since I'm using both smarty and adodb and my times were hovering around 1.5 seconds but I installed mmcache and I'm at 0.14 seconds now. Sweet! mmcache should really take out needing visual c and put this in its place 1. Copy mmcache.dll to C:\PHP\extensions\mmcache.dll 2. Copy and paste the mmcache settings into C:\WINDOWS\php.ini Ignore what I said earlier cuz I don't think you can make it any easier. -Original Message- From: Curt Zirzow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: November 17, 2003 10:29 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution? * Thus wrote Michael ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): I've tried installing it but I need MS Visual Studio C++ so they have to make it even easier. There is a compiled version on the website for windows. Go to the download section and you'll see that they have it available for multiple version of php there. Curt -- My PHP key is worn out PHP List stats since 1997: http://zirzow.dyndns.org/html/mlists/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
I was not saying or implying that Zend controls PHP alone. In practice they have the knife and the cheese in their hands, meaning currently PHP programs depend on Zend Engine to run. Maybe when somebody develops real PHP compilers things will be different. I know that you were not implying it, I just wanted to make my point. In practice it seems that Zend has the final say on PHP, and I think it's bad for the language. JS -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
Manuel Lemos wrote, in reply to Chris Shiflett: IMHO, if you really want to start some political debate or push your warped ideas on everyone, you can do it on another list. I am not pushing anything. I am just explaining why GPL extensions and libraries will not be accepted by the PHP group. I don't see the point in your hostility trying to act as censorship. You are not adding anything to the thread. I agree with you here Manuel. Thanks for the explanation about GPL and BSD, and it was a good point to add. However, I think that an encoder should not be part of the default php distribution, because it would *force* people to use the encoder supplied (I'm sure there would be means to use another encoder). Also, it would seem that PHP was endorsing one product over another, and such things are never good. As far as Zend goes, I don't think that they control anything...if anything, they have probably increased the visibility of php by essentially creating an entire company around it. Sure they contribute extensions to the php core, but anyone can do that -- the source is available for free. What I'm afriad is if things like why don't we include x in the default php install start, then soon we'll have why don't we include y in the default php install, which would lead to unecessary bloat -- and I don't think anyone wants that. One thing I like about php is that it is trimmed down, and web specific -- so anyone can download other components an integrate them. Just my opinions. -- Burhan Khalid phplist[at]meidomus[dot]com http://www.meidomus.com --- Documentation is like sex: when it is good, it is very, very good; and when it is bad, it is better than nothing. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
However, I think that an encoder should not be part of the default php distribution, because it would *force* people to use the encoder supplied and Also, it would seem that PHP was endorsing one product over another, and such things are never good. Yes. The problem that you are describing comes from the fact that there actually are those products. Had that functionality been in the PHP from start, nobody would notice. A burden from history, it is now. It would be certainly bad for the individual encoding products if PHP developers decided now to create the encoding right into PHP core, for example, but, I think it would be good for PHP language to have that feature by default. How is there going to be any big business in shrink wrap PHP software if there isn't a way to protect the source code, other than buying installing some additional software to go with it. Maybe this thread belongs to php.evangelism... What I'm afriad is if things like why don't we include x in the default php install start, then soon we'll have why don't we include y in the default php install, which would lead to unecessary bloat Well, a new feature cannot be turned out just because it would add some more kilobytes. That feature needs tu be judged by what benefits it would bring along those kilobytes. JS Disclaimer: I may sound strict and intimidating, but my bread butter may depend on things like this. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
John, et al -- ...and then John Smith said... % % I was not saying or implying that Zend controls PHP alone. In practice % they have the knife and the cheese in their hands, meaning currently % PHP programs depend on Zend Engine to run. Maybe when somebody develops % real PHP compilers things will be different. % % I know that you were not implying it, I just wanted to make my point. Fair enough. % % In practice it seems that Zend has the final say on PHP, and I think it's % bad for the language. Not at all. If enough decide to include some other encoding engine in PHP then Zend can happily withdraw all of their support from PHP, perhaps making a new product called zPHP or such, and the PHP camp is not controlled in any way. It seems a bit extreme and probably not worth it, but no materially different from supporting (insert your favorite and my least favorite cause here) and watching us part ways. % % JS I think that supporting this discussion any further might cause some others to part ways with this list, so let's be done here :-) HTH HAND :-D -- David T-G * There is too much animal courage in (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * society and not sufficient moral courage. (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Mary Baker Eddy, Science and Health http://justpickone.org/davidtg/ Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
Hello, On 11/16/2003 08:44 PM, Burhan Khalid wrote: IMHO, if you really want to start some political debate or push your warped ideas on everyone, you can do it on another list. I am not pushing anything. I am just explaining why GPL extensions and libraries will not be accepted by the PHP group. I don't see the point in your hostility trying to act as censorship. You are not adding anything to the thread. I agree with you here Manuel. Thanks for the explanation about GPL and BSD, and it was a good point to add. However, I think that an encoder should not be part of the default php distribution, because it would *force* people to use the encoder supplied (I'm sure there would be means to use another encoder). Not at all. An encoder/loader is just an extension can be enabled or disabled anytime. PHP already comes with extensions for the same purposes. Leaving it to choice of the user would make it more democratic. OTOH, it would provide further encouragement for commercial extension developers to do better than they do today. According to the Turck benchmarks Turck does better than all commercial extensions in script caching, including Zend and Ioncube's. Certainly part of this is due to the fact that Turck can optimize compiled PHP code better. So, the users may ask, why pay for commercial extensions if there is a better free extension? Just because commercial extension companies invested more in advertising to get more visibility and apparent credibility? I don't think so. Also, it would seem that PHP was endorsing one product over another, and such things are never good. As far as Zend goes, I don't think that they control anything...if anything, they have probably increased the visibility of php by essentially creating an entire company around it. Sure they contribute extensions to the php core, but anyone can do that -- the source is available for free. That is a very naive view of the PHP status quo. Zend develops the core engine that runs PHP. It is not a trivial task to do that. It is much more trivial to develop the extensions for which they charge thousands of dollars. As for Zend not controlling anything, that is totally out of the reality. Zend has been acting behind the scenes to keep away competing extensions. Just as APC authors that were victim of of major boycotts from Zend. Furthermore, within the PHP group there is inconsistent treatment regarding the use of name PHP for which the PHP Group does not even own a trademark AFAIK. For instance, there was a product named originally PHP encoder that the PHP Group made the author rename it and now it is called PHTML encoder. http://www.rssoftlab.com/phpenc.php This would not be a problem if everybody was treated the same way. However, Zend has in its pages a logo that says: Zend the PHP company. http://www.zend.com/images/Zend_logo_small.gif So, how come rssoftlab people may not call their product PHP encoder and Zend can call themselves the PHP company? It seems that everybody is equal but some (Zend) are more equal than others. For the matter, it is irrelevant for me if a rssoftlab uses PHP encoder as their product name and Zend call themselves the PHP company. I would not be surprised if this episode had the touch of Zend tentacles, but of course that is just yet another episode that went behind the scenes so we can only make suppositions! What I'm afriad is if things like why don't we include x in the default php install start, then soon we'll have why don't we include y in the default php install, which would lead to unecessary bloat -- and I Too late. PHP is already very bloated. That is why you can build many extensions as shared libraries and enable them at run time. don't think anyone wants that. One thing I like about php is that it is trimmed down, and web specific -- so anyone can download other components an integrate them. One thing is having plugable extensions that may not be loaded at the same time. Another thing is having plugabble extensions that are shipped with the main PHP distributions. The idea of John seems more like the later and let people decide which extensions to use. -- Regards, Manuel Lemos Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP http://www.phpclasses.org/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
On 11/16/2003 09:50 PM, John Smith wrote: However, I think that an encoder should not be part of the default php distribution, because it would *force* people to use the encoder supplied and Also, it would seem that PHP was endorsing one product over another, and such things are never good. Yes. The problem that you are describing comes from the fact that there actually are those products. Had that functionality been in the PHP from start, nobody would notice. A burden from history, it is now. It would be certainly bad for the individual encoding products if PHP developers decided now to create the encoding right into PHP core, for example, but, I think it would be good for PHP language to have that feature by default. How is there going to be any big business in shrink wrap PHP software if there isn't a way to protect the source code, other than buying installing some additional software to go with it. That is precisely what I think. I think the hole community could benefit from a more standardization of loading compiled files from disk. That would open a whole new world for more and more companies dedicate to the development of more professional products. Maybe this thread belongs to php.evangelism... Forget that list. It is moderated and the moderators boycott subjects that do not interest them. Basically it is censored. -- Regards, Manuel Lemos Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP http://www.phpclasses.org/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
Ok then, that's nice to hear. How about then the idea of including a reasonably good compiler/encoder into standard PHP distribution? For example Turck MMcache is one, gpl'd and comes as a php/zend extension. I don't think there are other free encoders as this, so there wouldn't even be a dispute over which to choose? -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
Well that's all good and grand but why increase the size of the distribution when it's not necessary to? Nobody wants to download something they don't necessarily need included. Nathan - Original Message - From: John Smith To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 12:24 PM Subject: Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution? Ok then, that's nice to hear. How about then the idea of including a reasonably good compiler/encoder into standard PHP distribution? For example Turck MMcache is one, gpl'd and comes as a php/zend extension. I don't think there are other free encoders as this, so there wouldn't even be a dispute over which to choose? -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
--- John Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about then the idea of including a reasonably good compiler/encoder into standard PHP distribution? For example Turck MMcache is one, gpl'd and comes as a php/zend extension. I don't think there are other free encoders as this, so there wouldn't even be a dispute over which to choose? Which one should be chosen? Doesn't it seem a bit ridiculous for the PHP development team to be picking a winner? Open source is all about choice, in my opinion. If I had to choose a winner, personally, I wouldn't pick your choice anyway: http://apc.communityconnect.com/ Chris = Chris Shiflett - http://shiflett.org/ PHP Security Handbook Coming mid-2004 HTTP Developer's Handbook http://httphandbook.org/ RAMP Training Courses http://www.nyphp.org/ramp -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
I think Zend even has their business model partly in the encoder software, there must be some need for it. Don't you think so? Granted, this would increase the size of the download by a hundred kilobytes. I have no connection to Turck MMcache in any way than just a user who needs it. But distributing software encoded with it is difficult while it is not so easily available (have to be separately downloaded and installed). Don't you think that this kind of functionality would be good for *PHP language* in general, in many ways? It would encourage some people to adopt PHP in the first place and not think of alternatives which offer this by default. And of course this kind of software increases the performance too, while it has the caching functionality as well. -JS Nathan Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Well that's all good and grand but why increase the size of the distribution when it's not necessary to? Nobody wants to download something they don't necessarily need included. Nathan -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
I don't think there are other free encoders as this, so there wouldn't even be a dispute over which to choose? Which one should be chosen? Doesn't it seem a bit ridiculous for the PHP development team to be picking a winner? Open source is all about choice, in my opinion. If I had to choose a winner, personally, I wouldn't pick your choice anyway: http://apc.communityconnect.com/ Yes, but, I don't think APC, while a good cacher, has the source code protecting (encoding into opcode code) feature? There is the Ioncobe encoder, Zend encoder and Turck that I know of. Of course any of them would suit me (just one opinion while everyone has one), but Turck is the only free one *I* know of. Well, if there is going to be a winner comtest, maybe Ioncube or Zend wants to join it, I don't know. -JS -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 07:52:28PM +0200, John Smith wrote: : : I have no connection to Turck MMcache in any way than just a user who needs : it. But distributing software encoded with it is difficult while it is not : so easily available (have to be separately downloaded and installed). I'm still having problems getting Turck MMcache to work on FreeBSD. It looks like the configure script is Linux-centric. That's a bit of a minus when it comes to distributing software across multiple platforms. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
Yes, it's still quite a new piece of software, at least so I have understood. But anyway, as an idea for the future. Just about any encoder would be great. If it's really built-in, always-on, that would be even better. Besides encoding, I think code profiling features should be (almost) built in too. Eugene Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 07:52:28PM +0200, John Smith wrote: : : I have no connection to Turck MMcache in any way than just a user who needs : it. But distributing software encoded with it is difficult while it is not : so easily available (have to be separately downloaded and installed). I'm still having problems getting Turck MMcache to work on FreeBSD. It looks like the configure script is Linux-centric. That's a bit of a minus when it comes to distributing software across multiple platforms. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 11:58:18AM -0600, Eugene Lee wrote: On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 07:52:28PM +0200, John Smith wrote: : : I have no connection to Turck MMcache in any way than just a user who needs : it. But distributing software encoded with it is difficult while it is not : so easily available (have to be separately downloaded and installed). I'm still having problems getting Turck MMcache to work on FreeBSD. It looks like the configure script is Linux-centric. That's a bit of a minus when it comes to distributing software across multiple platforms. I've successfully installed turck-mmcache-2.4.6 from FreeBSD Ports collection. cd /usr/ports/www/turck-mmcache/ make install -- zhuravlev alexander u l s t u n o c ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
Hey, Or CodeSecure from http://securecents.com Cheers, -Ryan P.S - biased opinion as i work with them. Ok then, that's nice to hear. How about then the idea of including a reasonably good compiler/encoder into standard PHP distribution? For example Turck MMcache is one, gpl'd and comes as a php/zend extension. I don't think there are other free encoders as this, so there wouldn't even be a dispute over which to choose? -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
Hello, On 11/15/2003 03:24 PM, John Smith wrote: Ok then, that's nice to hear. How about then the idea of including a reasonably good compiler/encoder into standard PHP distribution? For example Turck MMcache is one, gpl'd and comes as a php/zend extension. I don't think there are other free encoders as this, so there wouldn't even be a dispute over which to choose? The right place for you to discuss that is [EMAIL PROTECTED] (aka php-dev) as it is where most core developers hang out. Anyway, I don't think Zend people will allow a competing extension be included in the core PHP distribution precisely because it compromises their business. At most, they will not object to be included in PECL extension repository as PECL extensions are not shipped with standard PHP distribution. Either way, another problem of Turck is that it uses a GPL license. Most people do not understand that GPL software is not really free for the users despite what it is advertised. There are restrictions in the GPL license that prevent the software that uses it to be linked with other software without imposing license contamination, ie, software based on GPL license becomes GPL. This is incompatible with PHP and Apache licenses which are BSD based. Unlike GPL, BSD like licenses are really free for the users. So, linking PHP or Apache with GPL license would make them less free. Most people do not understand this licensing thing very well because they confuse free as in gratis which is what Apache, PHP and others with BSD like licenses, with strictly conditional free of the GPL software. IMHO, if you really want to make software free without confusion, forget GPL. -- Regards, Manuel Lemos Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP http://www.phpclasses.org/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
Anyway, I don't think Zend people will allow a competing extension be included in the core PHP distribution precisely because it compromises their business. This is exactly the reason I started this thread by asking Who controls PHP? ... Thanks for clearing this out. Either way, another problem of Turck is that it uses a GPL license. Most people do not understand that GPL software is not really free for the users despite what it is advertised. Yes, a good point. I could suggest that they change the license Lesser GPL, but of course I don't know how it goes (I don't have any connections to Turck people). I had to verify that it is really GPL, and it seems so. JS -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
--- Manuel Lemos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyway, I don't think Zend people will allow a competing extension be included in the core PHP distribution precisely because it compromises their business. [snip] IMHO, if you really want to make software free without confusion, forget GPL. IMHO, if you really want to start some political debate or push your warped ideas on everyone, you can do it on another list. Chris = Chris Shiflett - http://shiflett.org/ PHP Security Handbook Coming mid-2004 HTTP Developer's Handbook http://httphandbook.org/ RAMP Training Courses http://www.nyphp.org/ramp -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
Hello, On 11/15/2003 07:46 PM, Chris Shiflett wrote: Anyway, I don't think Zend people will allow a competing extension be included in the core PHP distribution precisely because it compromises their business. [snip] IMHO, if you really want to make software free without confusion, forget GPL. IMHO, if you really want to start some political debate or push your warped ideas on everyone, you can do it on another list. I am not pushing anything. I am just explaining why GPL extensions and libraries will not be accepted by the PHP group. I don't see the point in your hostility trying to act as censorship. You are not adding anything to the thread. -- Regards, Manuel Lemos Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP http://www.phpclasses.org/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Include an encoder into PHP distribution?
Hello, On 11/15/2003 07:31 PM, John Smith wrote: Anyway, I don't think Zend people will allow a competing extension be included in the core PHP distribution precisely because it compromises their business. This is exactly the reason I started this thread by asking Who controls PHP? ... Thanks for clearing this out. I was not saying or implying that Zend controls PHP alone. In practice they have the knife and the cheese in their hands, meaning currently PHP programs depend on Zend Engine to run. Maybe when somebody develops real PHP compilers things will be different. Either way, another problem of Turck is that it uses a GPL license. Most people do not understand that GPL software is not really free for the users despite what it is advertised. Yes, a good point. I could suggest that they change the license Lesser GPL, but of course I don't know how it goes (I don't have any connections to Turck people). I had to verify that it is really GPL, and it seems so. I don't know if changing to LGPL would be sufficient to be acceptable by PHP group. Still, you don't know if Turck author wants to change its license from GPL. The fact is that according to Turck benchmarks, it beats both Zend Cache and PHP-Accelerator. Since one of the important factors is Turck optimizer that is used by either the cache and the encoder, I do not know if Turck author wants to authorize the use of Turck code in closed source programs including Zend encoder and IonCube encoder, as it is potentially better and he may not be interested that competing encoders use their code. Of course, since Turck code is publically available, nothing would stop any closed source developers to steal his optimizer ideas or even code. However, keeping it GPL he would not be legitimizing it, regradless if that would prevent any real stealing to occur. Anyway, you should ask directly Turck author about his interest to change the license just in case Zend/PHP group ever agrees on an eventual contribution of Turck extensions, not just the encoder, but also the optimizer and the cache that seem to be probably the best in the market. The contact address is below in this page but I am not sure if it is upto date. http://turck-mmcache.sourceforge.net/ -- Regards, Manuel Lemos Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP http://www.phpclasses.org/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
