Re: [RFC] orphan extensions cleanup

Hi Stas, On Aug 15, 2016 11:50 PM, "Stanislav Malyshev" <smalyshev@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi! > > >> enchant: > >> I thought Pierre maintained enchant? Despite it haven't had much real > >> activity for years > > > > Well there are not much changes in the api. > > > > And it works. So -1 here. > > Wait, -1 for what? Having a maintainer? How that makes sense? OK, > there's no changes in API, but tomorrow comes security issue - who's > going to take care of it? Would we just ship knowingly broken code then > and not even tell users? > > >> gettext > >> WordPress can optionally use gettext for some of their po/mo files, > >> I'm not entirely sure how this is today[1], but it might be worth > >> taking into consideration if there are other users. > > > > Here as much as I do not like it. I have to oppose it. That is a major > > breakage (no, pecl is not the same). > > What is major breakage - having a maintainer for this extension? I'm > sorry, I don't understand it. Wrong position for a reply so it may have been confusing. -1 for moving them to pecl. And enchant has a maintainer. Gettext is one of these exts without an official maintainer but still maintained, no? It is used widely as well. > -- > Stas Malyshev > smalyshev@gmail.com