Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:20542 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 20285 invoked by uid 1010); 26 Nov 2005 13:26:40 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 20269 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2005 13:26:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 26 Nov 2005 13:26:39 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 66.249.82.206 xproxy.gmail.com Linux 2.4/2.6 Received: from ([66.249.82.206:39632] helo=xproxy.gmail.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.0 beta r(6323M)) with SMTP id 5D/4F-56276-E8268834 for ; Sat, 26 Nov 2005 08:26:38 -0500 Received: by xproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id t10so714226wxc for ; Sat, 26 Nov 2005 05:26:35 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=QCQmZzjchYMfN4yEB7oXuFAiGfVrGSPilQcvpq0mFQyxLHnObuIDo8ysh9dlMnG2T8MSWf2XLVYDRsUfXY+GgvE68asTyj4erW/wKVtKy12/EcU3Lski/UGrPfDimjNKG5stYjj3wWuXlo97YcmZb8nonIgIY9uI+lqGkmXbx/E= Received: by 10.70.15.17 with SMTP id 17mr7464427wxo; Sat, 26 Nov 2005 05:26:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.70.10.7 with HTTP; Sat, 26 Nov 2005 05:26:35 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <818043770511260526i4d9fb4e6k5af9e142c00941ff@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 14:26:35 +0100 Sender: sebastian.kugler@gmail.com To: Jani Taskinen Cc: internals@lists.php.net In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <4387E97B.4040300@prohost.org> <9784192ddeca75a1d77f5536f909b957@gravitonic.com> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Solution to date issue in 5.1 From: sk@webfactory.de (Sebastian Kugler) On 11/26/05, Jani Taskinen wrote: > > So you're also for letting PEAR dictate what PHP has and not the oth= er > way around? Somehow this doesn't sound right. This is not about PEAR dictating, and the PEAR developers are not those who would suffer from this PHP date class in the first place, but every user of PHP and PEAR::Date as well as every PHP developer who ever named a class Date. The problem is only more obvious because there is a popular PEAR class with this name. As a side note: There was a time when I thought PEAR was kind of an official PHP class library. You're almost implying that everyone who has ever used PEAR classes is just stupid. I think if PHP claims to have the right to introduce new standard classes with very common names, there should at least be a list of reserved class names and a notice about that fact (Know that was proposed yesterday on this list). Better would be namespaces or a PHP_ class prefix, of course. Regards, Sebastian