Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:6309 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 88845 invoked by uid 1010); 9 Dec 2003 19:58:40 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 88811 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2003 19:58:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx.thebrainroom.net) (65.200.24.98) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 9 Dec 2003 19:58:40 -0000 Received: by mx.thebrainroom.net (Postfix, from userid 517) id 7223E148808B; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 11:57:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from obsidian (zaneeb.thebrainroom.net [82.133.1.138]) by mx.thebrainroom.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DC1C1488087; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 11:57:29 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <05e501c3be8e$bc5c39a0$8802a8c0@obsidian> To: "Thies C.Arntzen" , "PHP Internals" Cc: "Thies C.Arntzen" References: Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 19:57:52 -0000 Organization: The Brain Room Ltd. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_30,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES version=2.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) X-TBR-Filter: Virus scanned and defanged Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] oci in pecl... From: wez@thebrainroom.com ("Wez Furlong") > it was actually my idea to for the oci8 stuff - and have some new > maintainer maintain it in pecl. Yep, I remember. > i see no valid reason against it. he can start hacking on it (in pecl) > starting today - once he is comfortable with it we'll nuke the ext/oci > and use(link, package) the stuff from pecl. We can go a little bit further than that; lets move it properly in CVS and roll a pecl release (1.0), and then Tony can continue his work in the way that pecl is supposed to be working. > loosing all history for the 2 files is not a deal at all if you ask me, > as not much has happened to teh code in the last many month. > why do we manage to make a big deal out of everything? I agree; I was surprised that it hadn't actually been moved properly, but thought that someone else had handled that (along the same lines as the surprise appearance of pecl/perl today). > if we get a new maintainer, i'd like him to be able to roll independent > from the main-tree. (also - don't forget - not too many ppls use > oracle, and those who do would be more than happy to get new > features/improvemnt from a new maintainer) This is precisely what I want to encourage in PECL. --Wez.