Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:44309 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 46925 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2009 16:56:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 16 Jun 2009 16:56:38 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=stas@zend.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=stas@zend.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 63.205.162.117 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: stas@zend.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 63.205.162.117 us-mr1.zend.com Linux 2.4/2.6 Received: from [63.205.162.117] ([63.205.162.117:33311] helo=us-mr1.zend.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id CA/39-31180-5CEC73A4 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2009 12:56:38 -0400 Received: from us-gw1.zend.com (us-ex1.zend.net [192.168.16.5]) by us-mr1.zend.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E15BEE12BB; Tue, 16 Jun 2009 09:46:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.16.83] ([192.168.16.83]) by us-gw1.zend.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 16 Jun 2009 09:57:01 -0700 Message-ID: <4A37CEC2.7050001@zend.com> Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 09:56:34 -0700 Organization: Zend Technologies User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lukas Kahwe Smith CC: Derick Rethans , 'PHP Internals' References: <4A31462B.1070302@zend.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jun 2009 16:57:01.0139 (UTC) FILETIME=[77A8A230:01C9EEA3] Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: bug #48247 again From: stas@zend.com (Stanislav Malyshev) Hi! > So lets delay fixing this issue until 5.3.1? Of course it can be fixed > in HEAD right now :) Delaying the fix would mean we release 5.3.0 that in mostly default config has an infinite loop bug. Maybe we can at least have temp fix and then when we have a proper one then remove it (or leave it in, it wouldn't hurt anybody)? For 5.2 it's even worse since I understand 5.2 is not intended to be developed past 5.2.10, except for security fixes. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect stas@zend.com http://www.zend.com/ (408)253-8829 MSN: stas@zend.com