Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:57453 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 67769 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2012 07:08:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 20 Jan 2012 07:08:00 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 207.97.245.133 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 207.97.245.133 smtp133.iad.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [207.97.245.133] ([207.97.245.133:47534] helo=smtp133.iad.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id CF/24-42843-FC2191F4 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 02:08:00 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp43.relay.iad1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 338142D02CA; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 02:07:57 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp43.relay.iad1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id BFC242D02F7; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 02:07:56 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4F1912CB.9030404@sugarcrm.com> Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 23:07:55 -0800 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yasuo Ohgaki CC: PHP Internals References: <4F08C9D9.9050009@sugarcrm.com> <4F18C9A5.9070607@sugarcrm.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Code freeze for 5.4 From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > Hi Stats, > > Ok, I'll hold committing to 5.4, but commit it only to trunk. > > Any comments form anyone? for committing to trunk? > Patch details and user land counter measure are in RFC. Re-reading the discussion, I see that the question of why we need separate validator handler is still unresolved. I think we were left with this: > In this case, users cannot distinguish whether PS module is adoptive or not. But this can be solved by documentation, unless you mean "users in the code" - but then I don't see how having new handler would help as PHP code can not really check for this handler, can it? So the question why we need such handler is still open. However if we would have binary compatible patch it probably would be ok for 5.4.1. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227