I'm annoyed! Quite annoyed!! Ok. I know none of you know me and I've not met any of you.
But, a while ago I submitted a relatively minor patch to extend PHP's php.ini filename to include the major version. This was an extension to the existing searching rules. As a windows user, I'm not in a position to build my own executables. I wish I was!!!! The patch would allow different versions of PHP to use the same SAPI but with different php.ini files. e.g. originally just php.ini, then php-cli.ini, php-cgi.ini, php-isapi.ini, etc. My patch would extend this to _ALSO_ allow php4-cli.ini, php5-cgi.ini, php6-ispai.ini (just examples - all combinations allowed). And the patch, whilst untested by me, would allow upto php V99. (I've been with PHP since just into V4, and soon V6 will be here, so PHP V9 seemed too short sighted). As this patch has REAL advantages for me and others wishing to use PHP4 / 5 and 6 on the same machine, with the same webserver (Either ISAPI OR CGI), I was surprised when it wasn't committed. Now the patch provided by Tobias, for what is, from his own words, completely possible in userland without any extension or enhancement to php core, seems totally redundant. Whilst I understand that you cannot have every patch supplied incorporated into the source, would you please comment as to why my patch was rejected? Are there some more hoops I'm expected to jump through? I know that there is a major focus on Unicode at the moment and this is taking a lot of time. This is why I though actually supplying a patch would be better received than simply a WIBNI approach. My intention here is NOT to upset anyone, especially Tobias. He had a problem and he fixed it and with the support of the core devlopers, his solution has been incorporated into the core. I have a different problem. I did the research and supplied a patch. The patch has been rejected. I do not know why. If there is more that I need to do to get this functioning, then a few pointers would be nice. Regards and true appreciation of the skills, hard work and dedication of the efforts of the core php developers. I make my living standing on your shoulders. Richard Quadling. P.S. I REALLY don't want to annoy anyone. Really. On 15/07/06, Marcus Boerger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Tobias, looks good after the update. Can you provide a patch for HEAD too? also please provide patches with "cvs di -upd". best regards marcus Friday, July 14, 2006, 9:30:48 PM, you wrote: > Hi all! > It occured several times in the past weeks, where I needed the filename > without extension as well as the file extension extracted from a > pathname. Since first calling pathinfo() and then basename() again, or > using string manipulation, I now patched pathinfo() to provide the > filename without extension per default with key "filename". > Find the patch here: http://schlitt.info/misc/pathinfo.patch > The patch is against 5_2. > Maybe someone considers that useful as well? > Regards, > Toby > --
-- ----- Richard Quadling Zend Certified Engineer : http://zend.com/zce.php?c=ZEND002498&r=213474731 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
