On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 10:22:25 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sebastian Bergmann) wrote:
> Rasmus Lerdorf schrieb:
> > Pierre can come to some sort of truce on the actual implementation.
>
> At least there is code from Derick on the table. If Pierre needs as
> much time to show code for his Date extensi
Michael Wallner schrieb:
> I assume you missed the existence and ignorance of pecl/date
I was under the impression that was Derick's extension and that it was
symlinked from the pecl CVS module into the php-src module. Sorry!
--
Sebastian Bergmann http://www.sebastian-berg
Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Rasmus Lerdorf schrieb:
Pierre can come to some sort of truce on the actual implementation.
At least there is code from Derick on the table. If Pierre needs as much
time to show code for his Date extension than he needs for PIMP -- which
is his good right and I am
Rasmus Lerdorf schrieb:
> Pierre can come to some sort of truce on the actual implementation.
At least there is code from Derick on the table. If Pierre needs as much
time to show code for his Date extension than he needs for PIMP -- which
is his good right and I am not {b|f}laming here -- I do
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
We need to fix this date thing along with the Digest Auth mixup and get a
5.1.1 out the door soon. I see Ilia committed a fix for the Digest Auth
thing, so assuming that this fix works, we just need to figure out what to do
with this date class. W
> This rename would also give us a migration path where you could have a
> simple: class date extends date_ex { ... } wrapper which could then be
> removed when we have the final internal date class implementation.
IMVHO this is a good idea. At least I greatly appreciate that it
wouldn't break app
