Implementation of HTTPD + FPM use case #4
Conversation
sophiewigmore
requested review from
a team,
dmikusa and
paketo-bot-reviewer
and removed request for
a team
sophiewigmore
added
status/blocked
|
@thitch97 this cannot be merged until there are releases of php-fpm and php-httpd |
sophiewigmore
force-pushed
the
implementation2
branch
from
7c2f045
to
2eb1881
Compare
sophiewigmore
removed
the
status/blocked
| Expect(os.RemoveAll(workingDir)).To(Succeed()) | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| context("the PHP_HTTPD_PATH env var is set", func() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think I understand why this case is here, but just to validate my own understanding:
Am I correct in thinking this case (which results in a HTTPD proc and NOT a FPM one) would be an unlikely one given PHPRC, PHP_FPM_PATH and PHP_HTTPD_PATH would likely be set by this point in the build?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, you're right on. This won't happen as of now with the way the buildpacks are set up. The plan is to eventually (post re-write probably) support FPM running in its own container, in which case this situation will become more common.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Understood. The php-fpm buildpack is expected to be optional based on RFC 0003, but it doesn't appear to be in this case. Is that also related to the plan stated above?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes! should have called that out. Also worth noting I would expect us not to cut a release of this buildpack until we have support for the Nginx + FPM case too
Co-authored-by: Tim Hitchener <thitch97@users.noreply.github.com>
Summary
Resolves #1
BLOCKED on the merge and release of:paketo-buildpacks/php-fpm#4paketo-buildpacks/php-httpd#3Use Cases
Supports HTTPD and FPM running in the same container
Checklist