On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Pierre wrote:
> > Just to clarify, it was Ilia who enabled the class, but just to move
> > the constants there. All methods are still disabled.
>
> He did it on Derick's demand. Ilia's mistake was to trust him. As Andi
> did too.
Since when do you think for Ilia? Your statem
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 19:49:04 -
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Nuno Lopes") wrote:
> >I must say that I feel deceived by this.
> > Derick and I agreed that this won't be enabled for 5.1, and he then
> > took advantage of the fact that release managers changed to enable
> > his class. Doesn't leave a good
I must say that I feel deceived by this.
Derick and I agreed that this won't be enabled for 5.1, and he then took
advantage of the fact that release managers changed to enable his class.
Doesn't leave a good taste in my mouth and it shouldn't happen again in
future.
Andi
Just to clarify, it
Matthias Pigulla wrote:
I still don't understand why - despite all the discussion here - the 5.1
release is still on the php.net website, being publicy announced and
there is not even a single hint what problems users might run into.
Every major company has a disaster recovery plan to make thi
> Von: Andi Gutmans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> BTW, just to clarify, I am not against a Date class (whatever its
> name) in the long run but I think it'd probably be a
> combination of work Derick, Pierre and new contributions.
It would be nice if there would be some 'official' statement as to
