Ah, but a list is not a discussion :)
Reminds me of a certain notice being posted in a disused bathroom
behind a door labelled "beware of the leopard", or something ;-)
I think "we" missed it because it wasn't discussed on the list, it was
just an item in a list of possible changes.
Not that I
It was part of the overall 5.2 change list that was sent to internals
before the 5.2 was branched.
Ilia Alshanetsky
On 25-May-06, at 10:14 PM, Wez Furlong wrote:
FWIW, I don't remember a discussion on this for PHP 5 either.
--Wez.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
T
Zeev Suraski wrote:
Marcus,
For the sake of world peace, let's say you're absolutely right. Let's
be done with this compat mode case study.
The important point is for the future - announce compatibility breaking
changes (removal of features, major changes to features) clearly on
internals@
You mean for PHP 6? IIRC it was discussed in the Paris meeting,
which were published and discussed... I wasn't in favour of removing
it, but I think it's less of an issue with PHP 6 than it is with PHP 5.
Zeev
At 05:14 26/05/2006, Wez Furlong wrote:
FWIW, I don't remember a discussion on th
riday, May 26, 2006, 7:04:08 AM, you wrote:
> That's because there wasn't one...
> - Original Message -
> From: "Wez Furlong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Zeev Suraski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: "Marcus Boerger" <[EMAI
Hello Robert,
when we first wrote the 6.0 list we were barely at 5.1. When we started
to work towards 5.2 we came up with a new list.
Friday, May 26, 2006, 5:38:55 AM, you wrote:
> I can't find any references to a discussion on this either.
Once again it was on the list and nobody was interes
08 AM, you wrote:
> That's because there wasn't one...
> - Original Message -
> From: "Wez Furlong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Zeev Suraski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: "Marcus Boerger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
> Sent: Fr
That's because there wasn't one...
- Original Message -
From: "Wez Furlong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Zeev Suraski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Marcus Boerger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 4:14 AM
Subject: Re: [
I can't find any references to a discussion on this either.
This change was also on the list for 6 and has been completed, would that
not be a better time to do this?
-bok
On 5/26/06, Marcus Boerger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Zeev,
Thursday, May 25, 2006, 11:51:44 PM, you wrote:
> At
FWIW, I don't remember a discussion on this for PHP 5 either.
--Wez.
On 5/25/06, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 23:44 25/05/2006, Marcus Boerger wrote:
>Hello Zeev,
>
>Thursday, May 25, 2006, 1:04:59 PM, you wrote:
>
> > At 21:29 23/05/2006, Marcus Boerger wrote:
> >>Hello Zeev,
> >
Hello Zeev,
Thursday, May 25, 2006, 11:51:44 PM, you wrote:
> At 23:44 25/05/2006, Marcus Boerger wrote:
>>Hello Zeev,
>>
>>Thursday, May 25, 2006, 1:04:59 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> > At 21:29 23/05/2006, Marcus Boerger wrote:
>> >>Hello Zeev,
>> >>
>> >>See here: http://oss.backendmedia.com/PhP52
>>
At 23:44 25/05/2006, Marcus Boerger wrote:
Hello Zeev,
Thursday, May 25, 2006, 1:04:59 PM, you wrote:
> At 21:29 23/05/2006, Marcus Boerger wrote:
>>Hello Zeev,
>>
>>See here: http://oss.backendmedia.com/PhP52
>> 12. 4. Drop ZE1 compatibility Done (marcus)
> (Sorry for the slow response, I
Hello Zeev,
Thursday, May 25, 2006, 1:04:59 PM, you wrote:
> At 21:29 23/05/2006, Marcus Boerger wrote:
>>Hello Zeev,
>>
>>See here: http://oss.backendmedia.com/PhP52
>> 12. 4. Drop ZE1 compatibility Done (marcus)
> (Sorry for the slow response, I'm traveling)
> Yeah that's fine, but it was
At 21:29 23/05/2006, Marcus Boerger wrote:
Hello Zeev,
See here: http://oss.backendmedia.com/PhP52
12. 4. Drop ZE1 compatibility Done (marcus)
(Sorry for the slow response, I'm traveling)
Yeah that's fine, but it was never discussed at all let alone decided
upon... IMHO it doesn't make
Hello Zeev,
See here: http://oss.backendmedia.com/PhP52
12. 4. Drop ZE1 compatibility Done (marcus)
And here:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=php-dev&m=114695447815299&w=2
Usually we just direct these kinds of questions with 'check the archives'
:-)
regards
marcus
Tuesday, May 23, 200
Derick Rethans wrote:
On Tue, 23 May 2006, Zeev Suraski wrote:
I know I'm a late bloomer on this one, but when did we discuss the
discontinuation of ze1 compatibility mode within the 5.x branch? I recall we
agreed to remove it for 6.0, but removing such a thing in 5.x seems very
counterintuitiv
On Tue, 23 May 2006, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> I know I'm a late bloomer on this one, but when did we discuss the
> discontinuation of ze1 compatibility mode within the 5.x branch? I recall we
> agreed to remove it for 6.0, but removing such a thing in 5.x seems very
> counterintuitive and counterpro
Guys,
I know I'm a late bloomer on this one, but when did we discuss the
discontinuation of ze1 compatibility mode within the 5.x branch? I
recall we agreed to remove it for 6.0, but removing such a thing in
5.x seems very counterintuitive and counterproductive.
If anybody can point me to a
18 matches
Mail list logo
