Re: [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

Hi Mike, > On 29 Jan 2015, at 11:14, Michael Wallner <mike@php.net> wrote: > > I’ve rewritten the RFC for pecl_http and hopefully addressed most of the things mentioned > previously. > > I you still find anything lacking, please let me know, so I can expand the RFC accordingly. The RFC is an improvement in that it covers more of *what* pecl/http is, but it still doesn’t answer the most important question: why? It still doesn’t answer any of the following key questions: * Why do we need pecl/http? * Why should pecl/http be merged into PHP core? * Why should pecl/http be enabled by default? * Why should we have our own HTTP API and not follow PSR-7? * What does it offer over PHP’s existing HTTP capabilities? * Why should we merge this rather than, say, filling in gaps in PHP’s HTTP capabilities? So, I think the RFC is still rather lacking. The Features section isn’t really any better than before, either. It only gives a sentence or two to each module, which isn’t terribly informative. Each module probably needs its own rationale, and a comparison to PHP’s existing facilities, as well. Thanks. -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/