sas Sun Jan 12 08:26:47 2003 EDT
Modified files:
/php4 php.ini-recommended
Log:
recommending SHA-1 as hash function
Index: php4/php.ini-recommended
diff -u php4/php.ini-recommended:1.123 php4/php.ini-recommended:1.124
--- php4/php.ini-recommended:1.123
At 06:42 AM 9/26/2002 -0700, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> > There is little point in maintaining backwards compatibility
> > if it can be established that there is no need for it
> > anymore.
>
>My worry is that this change appears to have absolutely no positive
>aspects and only negative p
andrey Thu Oct 3 09:03:22 2002 EDT
Modified files:
/php4 php.ini-recommended
Log:
colon written instead of semi-colon.
Index: php4/php.ini-recommended
diff -u php4/php.ini-recommended:1.110 php4/php.ini-recommended:1.111
--- php4/php.ini-recommended:
sas Thu Oct 3 02:51:38 2002 EDT
Modified files:
/php4 php.ini-recommended
Log:
Add recommened entries, including disabling the session bug/feature
Index: php4/php.ini-recommended
diff -u php4/php.ini-recommended:1.109 php4/php.ini-recommended:1.11
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 06:42:42AM -0700, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> Your reasoning is that somebody will at some point write a browser that
> can't handle 2-digit years and thus we should risk breaking existing apps
> for a small percentage of users. I think we should worry about this when
> such a
> Obviously this is a more recent WebTV, but I have also seen 1.2's. Can
> you say for sure that this browser handles 4-digit years correctly? If
> not, you have just broken my app.
WebTV clients don't handle cookies. They are stored and sent
by the intermediate server/proxy system.
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>
> > If Set 1 was truly empty, I'd agree with you.
>
> So, amazon.com and bn.com alike are missing out business
> opportunities? We should tell them! :)
Likely not, but given that set 2 is currentl
TECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-CVS] cvs: php4 / php.ini-recommended
> On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>
> > If Set 1 was truly empty, I'd agree with you.
>
> So, amazon.com and bn.com alike are missing out business
>
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> If Set 1 was truly empty, I'd agree with you.
So, amazon.com and bn.com alike are missing out business
opportunities? We should tell them! :)
Thus far, you only said that such software existed. Are you
now saying that you are actual
If Set 1 was truly empty, I'd agree with you.
-Rasmus
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> > My worry is that this change appears to have absolutely no positive
> > aspects and only negative potential. We know browsers exist that cannot
> > handle 4-digit years. Early WebTV boxes don
> My worry is that this change appears to have absolutely no positive
> aspects and only negative potential. We know browsers exist that cannot
> handle 4-digit years. Early WebTV boxes don't, early Netscape don't. We
> do not know of any browsers that cannot handle 2-digit years. Hence I
> fa
> There is little point in maintaining backwards compatibility
> if it can be established that there is no need for it
> anymore.
My worry is that this change appears to have absolutely no positive
aspects and only negative potential. We know browsers exist that cannot
handle 4-digit
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Sascha Schumann wrote:
>
> > > Frequently? So you have examples of browsers that do not handle 2-digit
> > > cookie years correctly? We know for sure there are ones that don't handle
> > > 4-digit years correctly.
> >
> > Cou
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> > Frequently? So you have examples of browsers that do not handle 2-digit
> > cookie years correctly? We know for sure there are ones that don't handle
> > 4-digit years correctly.
>
> Could you give examples of such browsers which do not fall
>
> Frequently? So you have examples of browsers that do not handle 2-digit
> cookie years correctly? We know for sure there are ones that don't handle
> 4-digit years correctly.
Could you give examples of such browsers which do not fall
in the ancient, unused category?
- Sascha
--
mfischerThu Sep 26 03:05:19 2002 EDT
Modified files:
/php4 php.ini-recommended
Log:
- Merge url_rewriter.tags description from Sascha.
Index: php4/php.ini-recommended
diff -u php4/php.ini-recommended:1.108 php4/php.ini-recommended:1.109
--- php
> - New software will automatically use the 4-digit format --
> there is basically no way to be unaware of the y2k date
> presentation problem. Since Netscape's spec does not
> mention Y2k issues and because it does not describe the
> windowing workaround, newly releas
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
> I saw Sascha's commit for php.ini-dist. Nobody objects it so I merged it
> to php.ini-recommended as it supposed to.
Here are some points to think about.
- Only ancient software, namely Netscape 2 and 3, cannot
handle the 4-digit format.
I saw Sascha's commit for php.ini-dist. Nobody objects it so I merged it
to php.ini-recommended as it supposed to.
I'm 0 for both On and Off.
--
Yasuo Ohgaki
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>> ; Enforce year 2000 compliance (will cause problems with non-compliant browsers)
>>-y2k_compliance = Off
>>+y2k_
> ; Enforce year 2000 compliance (will cause problems with non-compliant browsers)
> -y2k_compliance = Off
> +y2k_compliance = On
Why do you want to break old browsers? There is no Y2K issue here, it is
only a perceived Y2K issue. The 2-digit year in the cookie is interpreted
correctly by all
yohgaki Wed Sep 25 19:34:50 2002 EDT
Modified files:
/php4 php.ini-recommended
Log:
Merge changes from php.ini-dist
Index: php4/php.ini-recommended
diff -u php4/php.ini-recommended:1.107 php4/php.ini-recommended:1.108
--- php4/php.ini-recommended:1.107
21 matches
Mail list logo
