Re: com php-src: Add SO_REUSEPORT + SO_BROADCAST support via socket stream context option: NEWS UPGRADING ext/ftp/ftp.c main/network.c
main/php_network.h main/streams/xp_socket.c

On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Julien Pauli <jpauli@php.net> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> 2014.08.06. 5:17, <rdlowrey@php.net> ezt írta: >> > >> > Commit: a51bf0cadf7862d10b2cc19cae2c991d24d670b1 >> > Author: Daniel Lowrey <rdlowrey@php.net> Mon, 4 Aug 2014 >> 12:41:51 -0400 >> > Parents: 29eb0ea68605e81822e34d5a95443f2c176b2c73 >> > Branches: PHP-5.6 >> > >> > Link: >> >> http://git.php.net/?p=php-src.git;a=commitdiff;h=a51bf0cadf7862d10b2cc19cae2c991d24d670b1 >> > >> > Log: >> > Add SO_REUSEPORT + SO_BROADCAST support via socket stream context option >> > >> > Changed paths: >> > M NEWS >> > M UPGRADING >> > M ext/ftp/ftp.c >> > M main/network.c >> > M main/php_network.h >> > M main/streams/xp_socket.c >> > >> > >> > -- >> > PHP CVS Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) >> > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >> >> Hi, >> >> we are in feature freeze since beta1, and I don't see any recent >> discussion on this so I would like to revert it from 5.6. >> As far as I can tell this is a self contained feature addition so it is >> possible to be introduced in a micro version, but I think that an rfc would >> be warranted. >> > I'm not sure about the need of an RFC. > > This is just about adding options to our network stack, options which are > welcome and make our network stack richer. > I dont think there is need to discuss and debate, possibly infinitely, > about such additions which are self contained and welcome. > > However, I'm OK to say we should revert from 5.6 branch that we are trying > to make stable. > This could be added to 5.6.1 though, as the inpact is tiny and the > addition is self-contained with no impact elsewhere but in network. > > > Julien.Pauli > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/releaseprocess "Bugfixes only (with a room for exceptions on a case by case basis and only for small self contained features additions)." I interpret the case-by-case basis as some third-party (eg. not the author) has to approve. Currently we use the rfc process for making decisions, but I guess the RMs could also be the ones making such decisions. -- Ferenc Kovács @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu