Hey Michael!
I really appreciate you fighting against BC's in minor versions. We
certainly need to always be hyper aware of the impact BC's have on the
community.
First, I'll address your concerns you raised on GitHub here:
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/3649#issuecomment-435684017
> Well,
On Fri, 2 Nov 2018 at 20:30, Sammy Kaye Powers wrote:
>
> Hey internals!
>
> Given there has been at least two weeks of discussion around the RFC,
> "Improve openssl_random_pseudo_bytes()" and there doesn't seem to be
> any outstanding issues, I have moved the RFC into voting phase.
>
> The voting
On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 10:27 AM Nikita Popov wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 8:30 PM Sammy Kaye Powers wrote:
>
> > Hey internals!
> >
> > Given there has been at least two weeks of discussion around the RFC,
> > "Improve openssl_random_pseudo_bytes()" and there doesn't seem to be
> > any outsta
@Niklas: Ooops! Thanks for pointing that out. Done! :)
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/3649
@Nikita
> IMHO we should just document that it is guaranteed to always be true if the
> call succeeds and checking it is not necessary. But we should not penalize
> existing code that is checking the
On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 8:30 PM Sammy Kaye Powers wrote:
> Hey internals!
>
> Given there has been at least two weeks of discussion around the RFC,
> "Improve openssl_random_pseudo_bytes()" and there doesn't seem to be
> any outstanding issues, I have moved the RFC into voting phase.
>
> The votin
Hey Sammy,
could you please turn your patch into a PR, so it's easier to comment?
Thanks,
Niklas
Am Fr., 2. Nov. 2018 um 20:30 Uhr schrieb Sammy Kaye Powers :
>
> Hey internals!
>
> Given there has been at least two weeks of discussion around the RFC,
> "Improve openssl_random_pseudo_bytes()" and
