Hi,
2012/3/28 Stas Malyshev :
> Hi!
>
>>> Why would these change every 2nd commit? These only should change when
>>> you change the scanner, which happens very rarely.
>>
>> It depends what you do, but still annoying when it happens.
>>
>> But that does not answer the question...
>
> Looking at th
Pierre,
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> >> Why would these change every 2nd commit? These only should change when
> >> you change the scanner, which happens very rarely.
> >
> > It depends what you do, but still annoying when it happens.
> >
> > But that does not a
Hi!
>> Why would these change every 2nd commit? These only should change when
>> you change the scanner, which happens very rarely.
>
> It depends what you do, but still annoying when it happens.
>
> But that does not answer the question...
Looking at the patch, it looks like yours and git's li
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 2:33 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> $ git merge --no-ff --log PHP-5.4
>> Auto-merging Zend/zend_language_scanner.c
>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in Zend/zend_language_scanner.c
>> Auto-merging Zend/zend_language_scanner_defs.h
>> CONFLICT (content): Merge confl
Hi!
> $ git merge --no-ff --log PHP-5.4
> Auto-merging Zend/zend_language_scanner.c
> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in Zend/zend_language_scanner.c
> Auto-merging Zend/zend_language_scanner_defs.h
> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in Zend/zend_language_scanner_defs.h
> Automatic merge fail
hi!
How do you solve:
$ git merge --no-ff --log PHP-5.4
Auto-merging Zend/zend_language_scanner.c
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in Zend/zend_language_scanner.c
Auto-merging Zend/zend_language_scanner_defs.h
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in Zend/zend_language_scanner_defs.h
Automatic me
28 марта 2012 г. 0:18 пользователь Christopher Jones
написал:
>
>
> On 03/24/2012 11:17 AM, Alexey Shein wrote:
>
>> Done: https://wiki.php.net/vcs/gitfaq#multiple_working_copies_workflow
>
>
> I tried it out today. It mostly went smoothly.
Hi! Glad to hear that.
> Because of differing file con
On 03/24/2012 11:17 AM, Alexey Shein wrote:
Done: https://wiki.php.net/vcs/gitfaq#multiple_working_copies_workflow
I tried it out today. It mostly went smoothly.
Because of differing file contents in the branches (from my merge
attempts last week) I had to resolve conflicts when merging to
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Alexey Shein wrote:
> 26 марта 2012 г. 4:30 пользователь Stas Malyshev
> написал:
> > Hi!
> >
> >> Main problem is that our current workflow doesn't allow branch-only
> >> changes. I.e. if you make a bugfix and want to stay it in PHP-5.3 only
> >> you can't merg
Hi!
> Actually, this is not a bad thing at all.
> It makes sure lots of PHP projects and Frameworks stays on 5.3 as a common
> base for the next 1-3 years, introp wise that is a good thing.
How this is good? 5.4 is superior to 5.3 in... well, all aspects, why
denying people chance to use it for y
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 8:29 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> I don't think ability to reset handlers by passing null is a big
> problem, and creating another four functions seems excessive to me.
> Also, the use case for the latter ones is not clear - why would you need
> old error handler if you are n
I haven't seen any other yeah/neigh comments about these changes, does everyone
agree with them?
-Original Message-
From: Clint M Priest [mailto:cpri...@zerocue.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 2:00 PM
To: internals@lists.php.net
Subject: [PHP-DEV] Accessors v2.4 Proposed Changes
I'v
Zend/zend_language_scanner.c and Zend/zend_language_scanner_defs.h
are generated by re2c and under version control. This is not a
problem per-se. But since there is a timestamp in the generated
files they differ after a build, leaving the repository in an
unclean state:
➜ src git:(PHP-5.
André Rømcke wrote:
> I disagree. The lesson here is that the Ubuntu's security team should
> have discussed with us to see what are actually their worries instead
> of not following what is actually a good move for everyone.
Why? It is common practice to avoid .0 releases, including those f
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:27 AM, André Rømcke wrote:
>> I disagree. The lesson here is that the Ubuntu's security team should
>> have discussed with us to see what are actually their worries instead
>> of not following what is actually a good move for everyone.
>
>
>
> Why?
Non vanilla php.
C
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> hi,
> hi,
>
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Clint Byrum wrote:
>
> > I think the lesson here is to get the necessary bits from Suhosin into
> > PHP's core so that users can feel safe when using stock PHP, rather
> > than needing to wait fo
Hi!
> I think the lesson here is to get the necessary bits from Suhosin into
> PHP's core so that users can feel safe when using stock PHP, rather
> than needing to wait for the good and generous folks at the hardened
> PHP project to catch up.
Unfortunately, the good and generous leader of Suhos
17 matches
Mail list logo
