I've repackaged 5.0.4 and posted it on php.net. The only difference is the
addition of the missing file, everything else is identical.
Zeev
At 01:00 02/04/2005, Zeev Suraski wrote:
Folks,
We have a bit of a situation with the PEAR distro that's embedded in
5.0.4. It's missing the RunTest.php f
Hi James,
We never had a fourth digit and I don't think we should introduce one now.
Third digit (mini digit) is meant for only bug fix releases. I don't see
harm in bumping that up by 1. We've done it in the past.
Andi
At 08:51 PM 4/1/2005 -0500, James Ellis wrote:
Hi
I think a 5.0.4.1 would be
I'd go for 5.0.5.
I'm always wary about re-releasing the same version because then you can't
know why someone's having a problem.
At 12:00 AM 4/2/2005 +0200, Zeev Suraski wrote:
Folks,
We have a bit of a situation with the PEAR distro that's embedded in
5.0.4. It's missing the RunTest.php file,
Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Derick Rethans wrote:
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Mike Robinson wrote:
Would 5.0.4pl1 be inappropriate?
Yes, as we decided not to do that anymore and it looks "bad".
well, something bad has happened, so what? ;)
better than the potential confusion IMHO
and AFAIK version_compar
Derick Rethans wrote:
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Mike Robinson wrote:
Would 5.0.4pl1 be inappropriate?
Yes, as we decided not to do that anymore and it looks "bad".
well, something bad has happened, so what? ;)
better than the potential confusion IMHO
--
Hartmut Holzgraefe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
PHP In
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Mike Robinson wrote:
> Would 5.0.4pl1 be inappropriate?
Yes, as we decided not to do that anymore and it looks "bad".
Derick
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, James Ellis wrote:
> I think a 5.0.4.1 would be the best way to go (not sure what
> versioning to use), as there are no real code changes to justify a
> 5.05. You could then provide a patch with notes for those with 5.04
> installed or they could compile 5.0.4.1
Let's just rer
Hi
I think a 5.0.4.1 would be the best way to go (not sure what
versioning to use), as there are no real code changes to justify a
5.05. You could then provide a patch with notes for those with 5.04
installed or they could compile 5.0.4.1
I'd suggest if you rerelease the 5.0.4 as "5.0.4" then tho
Option [a] seems like the most logical thing to do, would probably work the
best. It might be nice to note on php.net somewhere right now before this is
fixed that PEAR will not install.
The options we have, as far as I can tell, are:
[a] Re-release 5.0.4 with that file
[b] Release 5.0.5 with th
Would 5.0.4pl1 be inappropriate?
Two different versions of 5.0.4 seems odd, and 5.0.5 seems too drastic as
you
mentioned. Otherwise, IMHO, just make a brief announcement, point them to
go-pear, and go through a normal 5.0.5 release cycle in a few weeks once a
few more fixes make it in.
Humbly, th
I
On Apr 1, 2005 5:00 PM, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The options we have, as far as I can tell, are:
>
> [a] Re-release 5.0.4 with that file
> [b] Release 5.0.5 with that file (seems a bit too aggressive considering
> there are no code changes, and may cause confusion)
> [c] Instr
11 matches
Mail list logo
