Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:18804 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 88643 invoked by uid 1010); 12 Sep 2005 15:08:08 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 88628 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2005 15:08:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 12 Sep 2005 15:08:08 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 64.233.184.192 wproxy.gmail.com Linux 2.4/2.6 Received: from ([64.233.184.192:56050] helo=wproxy.gmail.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.0 beta r(6323M)) with SMTP id 7D/62-27924-8D995234 for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 11:08:08 -0400 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 36so2238154wra for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 08:08:04 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=bBfexEE2LoYSmFKkfVfayH6pc4VfiMo6IetPSJWpLmVXI4tzBuOTScw+Bsy8LB9Q2k/glocaHW4DLtRfZJ3DTVIFCgu6m/5BUszqrGg13J7XkopehgX36XsmbZcdxiJn5WXGZoJ04JbaEXcwKeUg0YTNwBT2JEA6H6v6r1B2R/Q= Received: by 10.54.14.42 with SMTP id 42mr2699871wrn; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 08:08:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.154.16 with HTTP; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 08:08:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 17:08:04 +0200 Reply-To: pierre.php@gmail.com To: internals In-Reply-To: <432534E4.9020602@lerdorf.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <432534E4.9020602@lerdorf.com> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] ref fix revisited From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye) Hi Rasmus, You start a new thread for my question, maybe you will get more answers or at least better ones. If it is a reference or not, I do not care, it should not "act" differently. Understand that a quiet code in 5.0.4 must be quiet in 5.0.5. If we add notices in 5.1.0 and then make them fatal in 5.2.0, I'm fine. People will have time to migrate and "fix" their code. Regards, --Pierre