Hi,
This are tentatively looking like alpha3 could hit on November 18th.
So everybody please try to get whatever you are working on ready to be
finished and committed by no later than 13th. So that packaging can
happen on a stable tree on the 17th.
regards,
Lukas Kahwe Smith
mls@pooteeweet.org
Hi,
This are tentatively looking like alpha3 could hit on November 18th.
So everybody please try to get whatever you are working on ready to be
finished and committed by no later than 13th. So that packaging can happen
on a stable tree on the 17th.
Is the output buffering MFH still a lost cause?
-Hannes
hi!
On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 9:29 AM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
This are tentatively looking like alpha3 could hit on November 18th.
So everybody please try to get whatever you are working on ready to be
finished and committed by no later than 13th. So that packaging can happen
on a stable tree on the 17th.Is the output buffering MFH still a lost cause?
I hope not, it is a must have.
Cheers,
Pierre
hi!
On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 9:29 AM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 22:00, Lukas Kahwe Smith
mls@pooteeweet.org wrote:Hi,
This are tentatively looking like alpha3 could hit on November 18th.
So everybody please try to get whatever you are working on ready
to be
finished and committed by no later than 13th. So that packaging
can happen
on a stable tree on the 17th.Is the output buffering MFH still a lost cause?
I hope not, it is a must have.
To quote myself on this topic:
"These are all convincing arguments to have done this earlier. But
Johannes and I are a bit worried, that this code did not see that much
testing since it was checked in to HEAD quite a while ago. And seeing
that the backport is mainly cleanup and not bug fixing, we are a bit
worried about the risk this backport has (not necessarily in it
introducing bugs, but more about BC issues here and there). Especially
since it seems that you are the only one who actively looks after
output buffering .. (Johannes actually asked to have this stuff in PHP
5.3 months ago, but you were a bit MIA back then .. and nobody else
showed interest).
So unless you can take our worries away in terms of BC issues, I guess
we would prefer to leave this patch out of PHP 5.3.
Sorry about the misunderstanding and the work you put into producing
this patch."
regards,
Lukas Kahwe Smith
mls@pooteeweet.org
hi,
To quote myself on this topic:
"These are all convincing arguments to have done this earlier. But Johannes
and I are a bit worried, that this code did not see that much testing since
it was checked in to HEAD quite a while ago. And seeing that the backport is
mainly cleanup and not bug fixing, we are a bit worried about the risk this
backport has (not necessarily in it introducing bugs, but more about BC
issues here and there). Especially since it seems that you are the only one
who actively looks after output buffering .. (Johannes actually asked to
have this stuff in PHP 5.3 months ago, but you were a bit MIA back then ..
and nobody else showed interest).So unless you can take our worries away in terms of BC issues, I guess we
would prefer to leave this patch out of PHP 5.3.
Sorry about the misunderstanding and the work you put into producing this
patch."
It is why alpha releases are for. If we don't merge it we should
simply drop it in HEAD and forget it. This code has been there for
years now, it is time to bring it to a stable branch. The same applies
for other code in HEAD not having merged to 5.3.
Cheers,
Pierre
It is why alpha releases are for. If we don't merge it we should
simply drop it in HEAD and forget it. This code has been there for
years now, it is time to bring it to a stable branch. The same applies
for other code in HEAD not having merged to 5.3.
So, did anybody do a review of the ob code? I know it's in HEAD for
ages, but I consider the ob stuff a critical part of PHP which I don't
want to see broken, I'm fine with some random extension being broken,
but not with a central piece of PHP .. and even having it in HEAD
doesn't mean it's really tested there - I guess just a few people do
more with head than just compiling and running make test.
Back one year ago, it was discussed and I liked it but nobody had the
time&motivation to port it to 5.3, having it early would have been nice.
For now: Who does a review and who is willing to be responsible for
fixing probable bugs?
johannes