Just for the record, this question:
Don't know where that 9th is from? I posted my email around 11 am on
Tusday October 10th
Is answered by this sentence:
Ah yeah didn't thought of that, but I'm in NZ, so the dates I
talked about were UTC+13.
I'm in Europe/London time, so 11am for you was
On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 20:11:18 + / Rowan Collins
said :
> On 30/10/2017 03:14, Dan Ackroyd wrote:
> > The vote for this should have ended..3 days ago.
> >
> > At which point I believe the vote was actually passing.
>
>
> Hm, that's awkward!
>
> For the record:
>
> - voting was announced
On Wed, 01 Nov 2017 19:08:56 + / Rowan Collins
said :
> On 1 November 2017 17:47:55 GMT+00:00, BohwaZ wrote:
> >I can't find the place where we can see the voting history? Last
> >time I checked the page last week it was 6 to 5 or something like
> >that.
>
> See my email in this thread from
On 1 November 2017 17:47:55 GMT+00:00, BohwaZ wrote:
>I can't find the place where we can see the voting history? Last time I
>checked the page last week it was 6 to 5 or something like that.
See my email in this thread from a couple of days ago. Last vote was a yes, but
probably too late, leavi
Sorry I thought the vote would automatically close, but apparently it
doesn't work like that. I was away from the internet so couldn't edit
the wiki page.
I can't find the place where we can see the voting history? Last time I
checked the page last week it was 6 to 5 or something like that.
On Mo
On Mon, 30 Oct 2017, Rowan Collins wrote:
> On 30/10/2017 03:14, Dan Ackroyd wrote:
> > The vote for this should have ended..3 days ago.
> >
> > At which point I believe the vote was actually passing.
>
>
> Hm, that's awkward!
>
> For the record:
>
> - voting was announced on the evening
>
> It's possible that daverandom was several hours west of Greenwich at the
> time (e.g. in North America), where it was still late on October 27th. So
> taking the latest of the three published closing dates, and applying the
> most generous time zone, it's possible that all the votes were valid.
On 30/10/2017 03:14, Dan Ackroyd wrote:
The vote for this should have ended..3 days ago.
At which point I believe the vote was actually passing.
Hm, that's awkward!
For the record:
- voting was announced on the evening of the 9th "for two weeks" which
would imply the evening of the 23r
The vote for this should have ended..3 days ago.
At which point I believe the vote was actually passing.
cheers
Dan
On 9 October 2017 at 23:12, BohwaZ/PHP wrote:
> Kia ora,
>
> After some more discussions, I don't think we have much left to discuss on
> that topic, so…
>
> Voting is now ope
On 12 October 2017 at 16:48, Matteo Beccati wrote:
> Since no one is planning to do such refactoring anytime soon,
Actually, I am planning to.
> I see no
> reason to block any attempt to add driver-specific methods
I think I would be more likely to believe that argument, if we were
weeks away
Hey,
please add the voting dates below / above the vote on the RFC's page,
thanks!
Regards, Niklas
2017-10-10 0:12 GMT+02:00 BohwaZ/PHP :
> Kia ora,
>
> After some more discussions, I don't think we have much left to discuss on
> that topic, so…
>
> Voting is now open for 2 weeks on this RFC:
>
Hi Dan,
On 12/10/2017 14:06, Dan Ackroyd wrote:
> If we add more magic methods to PDO, that are only present when the
> connection was made to an SQLite DB, then there will be more mess to
> cleanup, and more people are likely to complain about BC breaks,
> if/when we refactor the features to not
On 12 October 2017 at 00:11, BohwaZ/PHP wrote:
> I don't really understand that logic. Yeah the existing behaviour is not
> optimal. But there is no other solution right now.
"First, do no harm", "given an existing problem, it may be better not
to do something, or even to do nothing, than to ris
On 12/10/17 00:11, BohwaZ/PHP wrote:
>> I think people were reasonably clear during the discussion.
>>
>> Having certain methods only available on an object depending on how it
>> was initialized is just not a good idea.
>
> As far as I know, no one volunteered to rewrite PDO to change that?
>
>
Le 12/10/2017 12:00, Dan Ackroyd a écrit :
On 11 October 2017 at 22:03, BohwaZ/PHP wrote:
Hey,
For people voting against the RFC, could you please explain your vote
here
so that we might understand?
Cheers.
I think people were reasonably clear during the discussion.
Having certain method
On 11 October 2017 at 22:03, BohwaZ/PHP wrote:
> Hey,
>
> For people voting against the RFC, could you please explain your vote here
> so that we might understand?
>
> Cheers.
I think people were reasonably clear during the discussion.
Having certain methods only available on an object depending
Hey,
For people voting against the RFC, could you please explain your vote
here so that we might understand?
Cheers.
Kia ora,
After some more discussions, I don't think we have much left to
discuss on that topic, so…
Voting is now open for 2 weeks on this RFC:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/imp
Kia ora,
After some more discussions, I don't think we have much left to discuss
on that topic, so…
Voting is now open for 2 weeks on this RFC:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/implement_sqlite_openblob_in_pdo
Vote will end on Wednesday the 25th of October.
Thanks to everyone who contributed to the
18 matches
Mail list logo
