On Sun, 2007-10-07 at 19:04 -0500, Ryan Panning wrote:
> Hi, what are the chances this patch can be committed to the 5.2.x
> branch? I'm working on a project which can benefit from this patch but
> 5.3 sounds to be a ways out.
Zero. 5.2 is a stable branch which can't get any new language feature
Hi, what are the chances this patch can be committed to the 5.2.x
branch? I'm working on a project which can benefit from this patch but
5.3 sounds to be a ways out.
Thanks,
Ryan Panning
Etienne Kneuss wrote:
Hello,
Thanks! I've that dynamic access of static members patch that is waiting to
Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
> I am a biased party here, so take this with a grain of salt ;-)
>
> First of all, I definitely think we need 2 release masters, for 5.X tree
> given that there will be two active branches, at least for the next few
> months, there is simply too much work for one person to
Since I already stated that I am only interested in the part of the job
that does not require php-src karma, I am probably not a good fit. I
would definitely change the job scope. As such I think Johannes is then
still the best option for this delayed take over because he can take the
full job
Steph Fox wrote:
So I'm with Ilia over all that. The question is who? Used to be that
whoever felt they had the time to do it could, so long as nobody fought
the proposal. I don't see anyone fighting against your proposal for
Johannes (I wouldn't either) but I also agree with Pierre's diagnosi
Hi Lukas,
I do not see why we need this delayed hand over. RMs managed to take over
during the process in the past and today we even have a check list for
this purpose. The main challenge is managing the politics on this list and
we all know how this works. Of course there are also technical i
Andi Gutmans wrote:
+1 and I think it's a good way for someone to get into the role.
I do not see why we need this delayed hand over. RMs managed to take
over during the process in the past and today we even have a check list
for this purpose. The main challenge is managing the politics on th
Developers Mailing List; Pierre
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP_5_3 Branched
>
> I am a biased party here, so take this with a grain of salt ;-)
>
> First of all, I definitely think we need 2 release masters, for 5.X
> tree given that there will be two active branches, at least for t
On 27.09.2007 22:06, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
> I am a biased party here, so take this with a grain of salt ;-)
>
> First of all, I definitely think we need 2 release masters, for 5.X
> tree given that there will be two active branches, at least for the
> next few months, there is simply too mu
I am a biased party here, so take this with a grain of salt ;-)
First of all, I definitely think we need 2 release masters, for 5.X
tree given that there will be two active branches, at least for the
next few months, there is simply too much work for one person to do.
My suggestion was goin
2 AM
> To: Lukas Kahwe Smith
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Stas Malyshev; Ilia Alshanetsky; PHP
> Developers Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP_5_3 Branched
>
> On 27.09.2007 15:41, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> > I like the of getting some fresh new blood to work on thi
To be honest I would like to have you as RM. You have the background
to take the right decisions and other can help when it comes to low
level technical or security issues.
From a management, feedbacks or compromises ready point of view, you
have already proven your abilities.
Pierre definitely
On 27.09.2007 15:41, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> I like the of getting some fresh new blood to work on this that was
> brought up with the proposal of Johannes. AFAIK he already said he would
> be willing to take on the job.
I like the way Ilia did (still does) his job in 5_2, so I would prefer I
On 9/27/07, Lukas Kahwe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jani Taskinen wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 17:20 -0700, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> >>> The 5.3 branch was just created in the CVS and is now open for
> >>> development. Please remember to MFH/MFB your patches to this branch when
> >>>
On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 13:41 +0200, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> Jani Taskinen wrote:
> > This brings up one thing overlooked: Who is the RM for 5.3?
>
> I like the of getting some fresh new blood to work on this that was
> brought up with the proposal of Johannes. AFAIK he already said he would
>
Jani Taskinen wrote:
On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 17:20 -0700, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
The 5.3 branch was just created in the CVS and is now open for
development. Please remember to MFH/MFB your patches to this branch when
making your commits.
Maybe it would be a good idea to start 5.2.5 release cyc
On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 17:20 -0700, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> > The 5.3 branch was just created in the CVS and is now open for
> > development. Please remember to MFH/MFB your patches to this branch when
> > making your commits.
>
> Maybe it would be a good idea to start 5.2.5 release cycle soo
Thanks.
On 9/26/07, Johannes Schlüter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 01:25 +0200, Etienne Kneuss wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Thanks! I've that dynamic access of static members patch that is waiting
> to
> > be commited:
> > $foo::myFunc(); etc..
>
> Done.
>
> johannes
>
I don't think that 5.2.5 will be the last 5.2.X release before 5.3 is
released as much as I'd like that to be the case. So, the need to
maintain 5.2.X branch will continue even post 5.2.5 release, but I don't
disagree with the idea of starting the process of 5.2.5 release in a
week or so.
Yes
I don't think that 5.2.5 will be the last 5.2.X release before 5.3 is
released as much as I'd like that to be the case. So, the need to maintain
5.2.X branch will continue even post 5.2.5 release, but I don't disagree
with the idea of starting the process of 5.2.5 release in a week or so.
On 9/26/
Hi,
On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 01:25 +0200, Etienne Kneuss wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Thanks! I've that dynamic access of static members patch that is waiting to
> be commited:
> $foo::myFunc(); etc..
Done.
johannes
> Here is the patch:
> http://patches.colder.ch/Zend/dynamic_static_calls_5_3.patch?markup
The 5.3 branch was just created in the CVS and is now open for
development. Please remember to MFH/MFB your patches to this branch when
making your commits.
Maybe it would be a good idea to start 5.2.5 release cycle soon - so we
get rid of pending fixes and need to merge between 5.2 and 5.3?
Hello,
Thanks! I've that dynamic access of static members patch that is waiting to
be commited:
$foo::myFunc(); etc..
Here is the patch:
http://patches.colder.ch/Zend/dynamic_static_calls_5_3.patch?markup
Thanks in advance!
Regards
On 9/27/07, Ilia Alshanetsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Th
The 5.3 branch was just created in the CVS and is now open for
development. Please remember to MFH/MFB your patches to this branch
when making your commits.
Thanks,
Ilia Alshanetsky
Release Master
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.
24 matches
Mail list logo
