Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:37653 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 71926 invoked from network); 14 May 2008 16:28:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 14 May 2008 16:28:22 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=scott@macvicar.net; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=scott@macvicar.net; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain macvicar.net from 193.227.246.108 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: scott@macvicar.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 193.227.246.108 ip246-108-v193.static.x-ip.net Received: from [193.227.246.108] ([193.227.246.108:57245] helo=lovelace.midden.org.uk) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 72/9E-31980-4231B284 for ; Wed, 14 May 2008 12:28:21 -0400 Received: from office.vbulletin.com ([217.155.246.60] helo=[10.0.0.116]) by lovelace.midden.org.uk with esmtpsa (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JwJrV-0000YF-47; Wed, 14 May 2008 17:29:53 +0100 Message-ID: <482B131B.4080409@macvicar.net> Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 17:28:11 +0100 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gregory Beaver CC: internals Mailing List References: <482B0E1F.1050900@chiaraquartet.net> In-Reply-To: <482B0E1F.1050900@chiaraquartet.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] objection to enabling phar for testing in 5.3? From: scott@macvicar.net (Scott MacVicar) Go for it, we can always change our mind before the vote if something comes up. Scott Gregory Beaver wrote: > Hi, > > I wonder if there is any objection to this plan: > > 1) enable phar by default for the PHP 5.3 betas, so that it can receive > full testing > 2) before RC1, do the formal vote on whether it should be enabled by > default in the release > > This way, phar can be tested for the possibility of enabling, but there > is an explicit safety net in place should it need reconsidering. > > My assumption here is that there will be a few beta releases and > possibly an alpha release or two prior to the first RC. > > Thanks, > Greg >