Hi all,
>> I agree with Michael.
>>
>> Even 1&1 and some other hoster does not provide 5.3 support
>> yet. Of course, testing is not really necessary for production
>> environment... but who knows what people out there are doing?
>>
>> And really I *wished* it would be
On 6 September 2011 10:55, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> Speaking on namespaces... one thing comes to my mind.
> Should we put log4php 2.x to maintenance only mode and create a
> log4php 3.x version supporting php 5.3 + namespaces?
I definately think we should do this, but not right now.
There is
> This means that people testing on PHP 5.2
> will have some skipped tests. Testing will NOT fail on 5.2. Currently,
> they will also have skipped tests if they don't have pdo_sqlite3 or
> mongodb extensions loaded (and a mongodb server up and running).
Well, I could live with that actually. Didn
On 6 September 2011 10:14, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> I agree with Michael.
>
> Even 1&1 and some other hoster does not provide 5.3 support yet. Of
> course, testing is not really necessary for production environment...
> but who knows what people out there are doing?
>
> And really I *wished* i
> from my point of view having PHP 5.3 as a requirement is not a good idea
> since some of the enterprise Linux distribution (for example SUSE and RedHat
> (at least up to RHEL 5.7 distributed since 2011-07)) still stick to PHP 5.1
> or 5.2. Therefore I’d prefer not to rely on PHP v5.3 just for sup
Hi all,
from my point of view having PHP 5.3 as a requirement is not a good idea since
some of the enterprise Linux distribution (for example SUSE and RedHat (at
least up to RHEL 5.7 distributed since 2011-07)) still stick to PHP 5.1 or 5.2.
Therefore I'd prefer not to rely on PHP v5.3 just for
