Hi Chris,
I've added a note into UPGRADING, but I didn't change php.ini-*
Thanks. Dmitry.
Christopher Jones wrote:
On 11/23/2010 01:34 AM, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
hi,
I've prepared the patch which completely removes compile-time
--enable-zend-multibyte configuration directive.
The configur
Hi!
During our namespace discussion, this is exactly what I warned about. In
order to make use of namespaces, you need to have atleast two "elements"
in your class names otherwise we can still never introduce a new class.
But that was not listened too.
I'm not sure I understand this point, cou
2010/11/23 Ilia Alshanetsky
> I think support 5 or even 3 parallel versions will be highly
> impractical and extra-ordinarily challenging. I think we need a plan
> that limits us to 2 versions and perhaps a 3rd one for critical
> security fixes only.
>
> 2010/11/23 Johannes Schlüter :
> > Hi,
> >
On 11/23/2010 01:34 AM, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
hi,
I've prepared the patch which completely removes compile-time
--enable-zend-multibyte configuration directive.
The configuration can be changed at run-tume using zend.multibyte=0/1.
The patch also fixes Unicode detection for phar archives.
I
I think support 5 or even 3 parallel versions will be highly
impractical and extra-ordinarily challenging. I think we need a plan
that limits us to 2 versions and perhaps a 3rd one for critical
security fixes only.
2010/11/23 Johannes Schlüter :
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 2010-11-22 at 23:21 -0200, Felipe
I too must second Mike's comments about pecl_http not being quite
ready for bundling. The extension provides some useful functionality,
no doubt (I use it ;-)). But I don't think there is a good case for
bundling it.
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Michael Wallner wrote:
> On 11/23/2010 10:57 AM
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Derick Rethans wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Derick Rethans wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> > >
> > > > > All the rest you write in the RFC is basically already as we do it.
> If it doesn't check for the hints, then your application will still work. I
> will say
> this once more: this is a *debugging* aid.
If your app *relies* on it, then it means it will probably not use other means
to ensure that the data is of the correct type, which may result in all sorts
of i
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Derick Rethans wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> >
> > > > All the rest you write in the RFC is basically already as we do it.
> > >
> > > yeah, maybe, but they aren't written down, accepted and w
> I find it interesting that apparently so many people don't want a new PHP
> version out, but forget to say what they think needs fixing. Instead of
> opposing, can we not do just some work?
Specifically the issue I'm most concerned about is the type hinting syntax.
Zeev
--
PHP Internals - PHP
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> > To me this alpha would be a "this is what we're mostly likely going
> > to have thing". I wouldn't like to see new major features, engine
> > rework being done; but I also think we shouldn't try to remove stuff
> > from it unless really necessary.
>
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
> On 2010-11-23, Derick Rethans wrote:
> > On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> > > Are we effectively going to create the original type checking
> > > implementation, but in a separate component people would have to
> > > install - ther
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
> On 2010-11-23, Derick Rethans wrote:
> > On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Felipe Pena wrote:
> > > . classes named as any of the type hint scalar types
> > > do not work anymore
> > > aka class int {}
> >
> > Yeah, there is a slight hint of a BC break in
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
> The status quo works great for those whom it serves. For everyone else,
> it stinks. There's no transparency, which leads to disenfranchisement.
That's why my first reply said:
I don't mind a yearly release cycle, as we should get out more r
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Weier O'Phinney [mailto:weierophin...@php.net]
Sent: 23 November 2010 14:18
To: internals@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Release Process
On 2010-11-23, Derick Rethans wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> > > All the rest you
> > For the record, I'm still very uncomfortable with this new language
> > syntax - even if it's a no-op right now.
>
> I know you are; but from what I understood, there were no more comments
> to the latest mail (with patch and RFC) that I've made towards this.
I know, I took some time off af
Just a thought from a non-dev
Rules/policies/procedures/process should always be written down or recorded
somewhere, otherwise how do you know what they are? and how do you make sure
changes to those rules are known about?
Having a central place that every can reference (wiki) makes a ton of sen
On 2010-11-23, Derick Rethans wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> > Are we effectively going to create the original type checking
> > implementation, but in a separate component people would have to
> > install - thereby creating two very different flavors of PHP?
>
> It's clearl
On 2010-11-23, Derick Rethans wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> > > All the rest you write in the RFC is basically already as we do it.
> >
> > yeah, maybe, but they aren't written down, accepted and well-known rules, so
> > you can forgot/misunderstand/bend them. :/
>
> And I
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Derick Rethans wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>
> > > All the rest you write in the RFC is basically already as we do it.
> >
> > yeah, maybe, but they aren't written down, accepted and well-known rules,
> so
> > you can forgot/misunderstand/be
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> and we didn't even discussed the current implementations, because the
> discussion was halted until the new revised patch is complete.
> which seems will be rolled out without further discussion.
Really? You had all the opportunity to comment on either
On 2010-11-23, Derick Rethans wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Felipe Pena wrote:
> > . classes named as any of the type hint scalar types
> > do not work anymore
> > aka class int {}
>
> Yeah, there is a slight hint of a BC break in case you have a class
> named "int" or "float" etc. But there is:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Derick Rethans wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Felipe Pena wrote:
> >
> > > Given the current state of trunk, I think 5.4 release process should
> > > not begin tomorrow (alpha or whatever other status). There are
> > > numerous
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> > All the rest you write in the RFC is basically already as we do it.
>
> yeah, maybe, but they aren't written down, accepted and well-known rules, so
> you can forgot/misunderstand/bend them. :/
And I don't think that is a bad thing. It's good to be a
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> > > We also have no plan about what will or will not be 5.4. This looks
> > > familiar, this is exactly how we begun 5.3 and it tooks literally
> > > years to be released. There is also actually no agreement to begin
> > > with 5.4 now.
> >
> > Yes, but
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Michael Wallner wrote:
> On 11/23/2010 10:57 AM, Derick Rethans wrote:
> > On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Felipe Pena wrote:
>
> > > - pecl/http was planned to be bundled. What's the status?
> >
> > I'm all for it; but again, it's just copying it over to trunk before we
> > branch.
>
On 11/23/2010 02:30 AM, Felipe Pena wrote:
Given the current state of trunk, I think 5.4 release process should
not begin tomorrow (alpha or whatever other status). There are
numerous identified issues that we need to fix before even think to
begin with a release. For example:
...
We also have
On 11/23/2010 10:57 AM, Derick Rethans wrote:
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Felipe Pena wrote:
- pecl/http was planned to be bundled. What's the status?
I'm all for it; but again, it's just copying it over to trunk before we
branch.
...
- copy over APC/pecl_http
- branch on thursday
- alpha next w
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Derick Rethans [mailto:der...@php.net]
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 11:58 AM
> > To: Felipe Pena
> > Cc: internals
> > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Hold off 5.4
> >
> > On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Felipe
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:07 AM, Derick Rethans wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Felipe Pena wrote:
>
> > With the recent chaos in the way we begin and ended releases, we would
> > like to propose a clean way to deal with releases and related decisions:
> [1]
>
> Really? I think you're blowing this
> -Original Message-
> From: Derick Rethans [mailto:der...@php.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 11:58 AM
> To: Felipe Pena
> Cc: internals
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Hold off 5.4
>
> On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Felipe Pena wrote:
>
> > Given the current state of trunk, I think 5.4 release
>
>
> > We also have no plan about what will or will not be 5.4. This looks
> > familiar, this is exactly how we begun 5.3 and it tooks literally
> > years to be released. There is also actually no agreement to begin
> > with 5.4 now.
>
> Yes, but instead of defining "what is PHP 5.4", why not just
On Tue, 2010-11-23 at 10:55 +0100, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> and the 5.4 was selected for the next version without vote (maybe irc...)
As we are not marketing-driven version numbers follow technical
reasoning. There's no larger BC break (like a radical change in the
object model like from 4 to 5) and
On Tue, 2010-11-23 at 10:51 +0100, Stefan Marr wrote:
>
> On 23 Nov 2010, at 02:30, Felipe Pena wrote:
>
> > - Traits may not be ready yet for pre-release
> > - see http://svn.php.net/viewvc?view=revision&revision=298348
> The listed todos where:
> - Reflection API
> That was implemented by Jo
Gustavo Lopes wrote:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 09:34:49 -, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
hi,
I've prepared the patch which completely removes compile-time
--enable-zend-multibyte configuration directive.
The configuration can be changed at run-tume using zend.multibyte=0/1.
The patch also fixes Unic
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 09:34:49 -, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
hi,
I've prepared the patch which completely removes compile-time
--enable-zend-multibyte configuration directive.
The configuration can be changed at run-tume using zend.multibyte=0/1.
The patch also fixes Unicode detection for phar a
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Felipe Pena wrote:
> With the recent chaos in the way we begin and ended releases, we would
> like to propose a clean way to deal with releases and related decisions: [1]
Really? I think you're blowing this all way out of proportion.
I don't mind a yearly release cycle, as
Am 23.11.2010 10:57, schrieb Derick Rethans:
> I am absolutely against stalling again!
+1
If there is anything that needs particular TLC (testing/loving/care),
let me know. FYI, at the moment I am playing a lot with traits to get
a(n updated) feel for them.
--
Sebastian Bergmann
Derick Rethans wrote:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
I've prepared the patch which completely removes compile-time
--enable-zend-multibyte configuration directive.
The configuration can be changed at run-tume using zend.multibyte=0/1.
The patch also fixes Unicode detection for ph
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
> I've prepared the patch which completely removes compile-time
> --enable-zend-multibyte configuration directive.
>
> The configuration can be changed at run-tume using zend.multibyte=0/1.
>
> The patch also fixes Unicode detection for phar archives.
>
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Felipe Pena wrote:
> Given the current state of trunk, I think 5.4 release process should
> not begin tomorrow (alpha or whatever other status). There are
> numerous identified issues that we need to fix before even think to
> begin with a release. For example:
>
> - type hin
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:35 AM, Patrick ALLAERT wrote:
> 2010/11/23 Felipe Pena :
> > Given the current state of trunk, I think 5.4 release process should
> > not begin tomorrow (alpha or whatever other status). There are
> > numerous identified issues that we need to fix before even think to
>
Am 23.11.2010 02:30, schrieb Felipe Pena:
> classes named as any of the type hint scalar types do not work anymore
Was it not a promise of the re2c/lemon migration to allow reserved words
as class/function names?
--
Sebastian BergmannCo-Founder and Principal Consultant
http
Hi:
On 23 Nov 2010, at 02:30, Felipe Pena wrote:
> - Traits may not be ready yet for pre-release
> - see http://svn.php.net/viewvc?view=revision&revision=298348
The listed todos where:
- Reflection API
That was implemented by Johannes as far as I remember.
- support for traits for internal c
2010/11/23 Felipe Pena :
> Given the current state of trunk, I think 5.4 release process should
> not begin tomorrow (alpha or whatever other status). There are
> numerous identified issues that we need to fix before even think to
> begin with a release. For example:
>
> - type hinting (or strict h
hi,
I've prepared the patch which completely removes compile-time
--enable-zend-multibyte configuration directive.
The configuration can be changed at run-tume using zend.multibyte=0/1.
The patch also fixes Unicode detection for phar archives.
I would like to commit it on Thursday.
Thanks.
Hi,
On Mon, 2010-11-22 at 23:21 -0200, Felipe Pena wrote:
> With the recent chaos in the way we begin and ended releases, we would
> like to propose a clean way to deal with releases and related decisions: [1]
Thanks for preparing this. I have one change proposal:
With the proposed model it migh
47 matches
Mail list logo
