Re: php_firebird

Hi On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 12:52 AM, Jochem Maas <jochem@iamjochem.com> wrote: > Lukas Kahwe Smith schreef: >> >> On 07.10.2008, at 20:18, Lester Caine wrote: >> >>> What is the correct procedure to create a new driver, or rather clone >>> the existing php_interbase so that we can build a proper Firebird >>> version that actually uses the fbclient.dll rather than sharing the >>> now incompatible GDS32.DLL client. Some people are starting to use >>> Interbase in parallel with Firebird, but the driver can only access >>> one client :( > > not that I give a **** about the windows interbase/firebird extension .. but .. When will you (all) understand that it is not only a windows problem? The fact that windows is likely to do not have it in 5.3 is only a side effect of the lack of developers around this extension (zero developer). And seriously, comments like that do not have their place in this list. I could say the same about firebird and simply keep away from the windows releases and let the firebird users deal with that. > I do use firebird and all this talk of dropping firebird support is kind of scary > (well really scary actually) ... I am able to configure php with '--with-interbase' > in 5.3alpha2 so I guess I don't need to worry. We are not talking about abandon it but moving out of core. Please note that it will not happen tomorrow (5.3). But if nothing changes, I do not see how this extension could remain in core without maintainers, but that's not something I can decide on my own or for 5.3 :) I find amazing that so many users are scary about loosing firebird in core (they can always install it via pecl then) but I do not see too much love around it (unit tests, bugs reports, patches, attempt to contact the firebird developers, etc.). > effectively the extension for firebird already exists ... it just maps to the interbase > function, if the fbird_*() aliases were removed and renamed copies the ibase_*() > extensions functions created that then were built against the firebird client iso > the interbase client you'd pretty much be there. technically the [firebird] extension > would be new but is that really a deal breaker given that the complete API (fbird_*()) > already exists? I do not understand this paragraph. > PS - I've been trying to follow these firebird shannanigans but it's all been > a little too UPPER CASE for me to grok. :-/ Agreed :) Cheers, -- Pierre http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org