Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process (was: Re: [PHP-CVS] cvs: php4 /configure.in /main php_version.h)

On Fri, 15 Mar 2002, Edin Kadribasic wrote: > > sounds ok to me, i'll mail a faster release schedule later this day and if > > nobody objects i'll package rc1 tomorrow. > > Since we are trying to improve QA I think RC1 (and the rest of them) should > be announced on the list and on www.php.net i

Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process (was: Re: [PHP-CVS] cvs: php4 / configure.in /main php_version.h)

> sounds ok to me, i'll mail a faster release schedule later this day and if > nobody objects i'll package rc1 tomorrow. Since we are trying to improve QA I think RC1 (and the rest of them) should be announced on the list and on www.php.net in order to get more people to test it. Are there any r

Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process (was: Re: [PHP-CVS] cvs: php4 /configure.in /main php_version.h)

On Fri, 15 Mar 2002, Edin Kadribasic wrote: > I agree that the main issue here the release process. I don't think it's > working very well now. How long ago was PHP_4_0_7 branch made? It's not that > ecouraging fixing a bug or adding a new feature and telling people that the > fix or feature will

[PHP-DEV] Release process (was: Re: [PHP-CVS] cvs: php4 / configure.in /main php_version.h)

I agree that the main issue here the release process. I don't think it's working very well now. How long ago was PHP_4_0_7 branch made? It's not that ecouraging fixing a bug or adding a new feature and telling people that the fix or feature will be released in 6 months or so. So how do we cut the

Re: [PHP-DEV] release process

On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Marc Boeren wrote: > > > I promised to send a more detailed mail for the upcoming release > process. > > Please note that this is my view on it :) > > And your view is off by one month? ;-) Damnit... I thought I fixed that :) Derick ---

Re: [PHP-DEV] release process

> I promised to send a more detailed mail for the upcoming release process. > Please note that this is my view on it :) And your view is off by one month? ;-) [otherwise it looks fine] Cheerio, Marc. -- PHP Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.

[PHP-DEV] release process

Hello folks, I promised to send a more detailed mail for the upcoming release process. Please note that this is my view on it :) Timeline 06-02-2002 Branch to PHP_4_2_0 Only fixed / patches approved by the RM maybe merged from HEAD into the release branch. This is

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV]Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

On Fri, 4 May 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote: > At 17:30 4/5/2001, Joe Brown wrote: > >Question: > >Is is_null() an alias for isset()? > > > >Based on this statement and my understanding of both funcitons, it should > >be. > > No it's not, it's a function. As such, it cannot detect whether a variable

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 17:30 4/5/2001, Joe Brown wrote: >Question: >Is is_null() an alias for isset()? > >Based on this statement and my understanding of both funcitons, it should >be. No it's not, it's a function. As such, it cannot detect whether a variable exists and has a null value, or is undefined completely

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

Question: Is is_null() an alias for isset()? Based on this statement and my understanding of both funcitons, it should be. "Andi Gutmans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > At 07:02 PM 5/3/2001 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote: > >At 06:31 PM 5/3/01 -

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 08:48 PM 5/3/2001 -0400, David Croft wrote: >In my humble opinion 'null' is a 'pseudovalue' that has been made >available for some time. If it was never intended for a script to be able >to use it, it should never have been exposed. But it has been and many >people, myself included, are using

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV]Release process

In my humble opinion 'null' is a 'pseudovalue' that has been made available for some time. If it was never intended for a script to be able to use it, it should never have been exposed. But it has been and many people, myself included, are using it. It is particularly useful to mark a value tha

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV]Release process

On Thu, 3 May 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: > At 08:53 AM 5/3/2001 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote: > >Um, but some db extensions return NULL values as part of the array, so > >if column 'foo' is NULL in the db, you'd want the result array to have > >NULL under key 'foo' - it just won't do to have that

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 07:16 PM 5/3/2001 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote: >At 03:14 AM 5/4/01 +0300, Andi Gutmans wrote: >>Not exactly. No matter if it is set to NULL or unset then isset() will >>give the same result. >>And most people use isset() AFAIK. > >Whatever the current situation, there needs to be a way to che

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 03:14 AM 5/4/01 +0300, Andi Gutmans wrote: >Not exactly. No matter if it is set to NULL or unset then isset() will >give the same result. >And most people use isset() AFAIK. Whatever the current situation, there needs to be a way to check whether a certain array entry is NULL or not. -Andre

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 07:02 PM 5/3/2001 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote: >At 06:31 PM 5/3/01 -0500, Richard Lynch wrote: >>Um, lots of people use isset($row['foo]) to detect NULL in the database... >> >>Are you going to change that behaviour? >> >>Don't. >> >>If the column is missing, they screwed up their SQL, which i

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 06:31 PM 5/3/01 -0500, Richard Lynch wrote: >Um, lots of people use isset($row['foo]) to detect NULL in the database... > >Are you going to change that behaviour? > >Don't. > >If the column is missing, they screwed up their SQL, which is not within the >pervue of PHP to fix in the first place..

[PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

> On Thu, 03 May 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: > > Yeah but I'm afraid it'll make scripts be written on behavior which > > shouldn't be counted on. > > Maybe in future versions of Zend $array['foo'] won't be defined. There are > > certain situations where I think it was impossible to not define it so

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 01:04 PM 5/3/2001 -0400, Joe Brown wrote: >is_null() should return false if a variable is not set. Well it doesn't. There ya go :) >isset() should be used to test for variables existance, not is_null(). > >This is my opinion and I'm sticking to it. Those whom deviate from my >opinion are wro

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

is_null() should return false if a variable is not set. isset() should be used to test for variables existance, not is_null(). This is my opinion and I'm sticking to it. Those whom deviate from my opinion are wrong in my opinion!!! -Joe "Andi Gutmans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMA

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 10:38 AM 5/3/2001 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote: >On Thu, 03 May 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: > > How do you know today if it's NULL or not? > >is_null()? is_null() will also return true if it's undefined. Andi -- PHP Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAI

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

On Thu, 03 May 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: > How do you know today if it's NULL or not? is_null()? -Andrei We all have photographic memories, it's just that some of us don't have any film. -- PHP Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For addit

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

This should be wrong. If $a is not set, then it cannot be set to null... "Andi Gutmans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > If $a is undefined and you do is_null($a) I supposed you get true. > I was talking about a language construct which will give

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 18:25 3/5/2001, Andrei Zmievski wrote: >On Thu, 03 May 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > Sure. I just did. :) > > > > Adding an isnull() language construct may be the right way to solve this > > situation; key_exists() and the today's function is_null() are both > > functions that duplicate langu

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 10:24 AM 5/3/2001 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote: >On Thu, 03 May 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: > > >Also, have you seen people complain about my patch to MySQL that adds > > >NULL's to the result set? > > > > No because isset() returns false for NULL values. But many people would > > like it to retu

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

On Thu, 03 May 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote: > Sure. I just did. :) > > Adding an isnull() language construct may be the right way to solve this > situation; key_exists() and the today's function is_null() are both > functions that duplicate language-level functionality, and shouldn't exist > IM

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

On Thu, 03 May 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: > >Also, have you seen people complain about my patch to MySQL that adds > >NULL's to the result set? > > No because isset() returns false for NULL values. But many people would > like it to return true, and then it would break people's scripts. I guess

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 18:17 3/5/2001, Andrei Zmievski wrote: >Also, have you seen people complain about my patch to MySQL that adds >NULL's to the result set? Sure. I just did. :) Adding an isnull() language construct may be the right way to solve this situation; key_exists() and the today's function is_null()

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 10:17 AM 5/3/2001 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote: >On Thu, 03 May 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: > > Anyway, it's not something I think we should change right now. > > I think Andrei's MySQL patch should be reverted though. Many people are > > doing isset($row["foo"]) on their MySQL query results. Tod

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

On Thu, 03 May 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: > Anyway, it's not something I think we should change right now. > I think Andrei's MySQL patch should be reverted though. Many people are > doing isset($row["foo"]) on their MySQL query results. Today if "foo" is > NULL it will return false. If this is e

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 11:01 PM 5/2/2001 -0400, Sterling Hughes wrote: >IsAvailable() > >[sterling@localhost standard]$ grep is_null * >basic_functions.c: PHP_FE(is_null, >first_arg_allow_ref) >basic_functions.c:/* {{{ proto bool is_null(mixed var) >basic_functions.c:PHP_FUNCTION(is_null) >basic_functions.h:PHP_

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

If $a is undefined and you do is_null($a) I supposed you get true. I was talking about a language construct which will give false in this case. Anyway, it's not something I think we should change right now. I think Andrei's MySQL patch should be reverted though. Many people are doing isset($row[

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV]Release process

On Thu, 3 May 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: > At 10:43 AM 5/3/2001 -0400, Joe Brown wrote: > >What about an isnull() function, opposed to key_exists(); > > > >IsPossible()? > > Yeah that's definitely a possiblity but then you'd have to do something like. > if (isset($a["foo"]) || isnull($a["foo")) >

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

RTFM :)) http://www.php.net/manual/en/html/function.is-null.html At 16:47 3.5. 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote the following: -- >At 10:43 AM 5/3/2001 -0400, Joe Brown wrote: >>What about an isnull() function, opposed to key_exists(); >> >>Is

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

No plans to do anything at this point. You can keep all your hairs in tact :) Zeev At 17:42 3/5/2001, Jani Taskinen wrote: >On Thu, 3 May 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > >At 17:20 3/5/2001, Cynic wrote: > >>I very much agree with Andrei on this. Please, keep the > >>existing functionality. > >> >

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 10:43 AM 5/3/2001 -0400, Joe Brown wrote: >What about an isnull() function, opposed to key_exists(); > >IsPossible()? Yeah that's definitely a possiblity but then you'd have to do something like. if (isset($a["foo"]) || isnull($a["foo")) Kind of sucky. But we should think of a good resolution

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

What about an isnull() function, opposed to key_exists(); IsPossible()? "Zeev Suraski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > At 16:46 3/5/2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: > >> > By the way, what happened to that array_defined() or whatever function > >> > w

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV]Release process

On Thu, 3 May 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote: >At 17:20 3/5/2001, Cynic wrote: >>I very much agree with Andrei on this. Please, keep the >>existing functionality. >> >>Although, I'm not familiar with any issues possibly connected >>with this. Does it hurt anything? > >Yes, it requires adding of functio

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

On Thu, 03 May 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote: > Yes, it requires adding of functions that duplicate isset()'s behavior in a > way that may change in the future (implementation dependent). What do you mean? You won't be able to store NULL's in the arrays? -Andrei * I don't mind going nowhere as long

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 17:20 3/5/2001, Cynic wrote: >I very much agree with Andrei on this. Please, keep the >existing functionality. > >Although, I'm not familiar with any issues possibly connected >with this. Does it hurt anything? Yes, it requires adding of functions that duplicate isset()'s behavior in a way th

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

I very much agree with Andrei on this. Please, keep the existing functionality. Although, I'm not familiar with any issues possibly connected with this. Does it hurt anything? At 16:03 3.5. 2001, Andrei Zmievski wrote the following:

[PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

insert "impossible" somewhere in the sentence to make it make sense. At 16:04 3.5. 2001, Cynic wrote the following: -- >Err, as you say, PHP should make things easy. I don't see how >making tell NULL from an undefined variable makes an

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

On Thu, 03 May 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote: > Hmmm, looks like the MySQL module was changed to add NULL elements to the > array. It even looks as if you changed it :) > I intentionally removed the code that populated return values with NULL's, > to avoid inconsistencies. People should use the mys

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 16:56 3/5/2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: Um, but some db extensions return NULL values as part of the array, so >>if column 'foo' is NULL in the db, you'd want the result array to have >>NULL under key 'foo' - it just won't do to have that column be missing. > >Yeah but you can use === NULL for thos

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

Hmmm, looks like the MySQL module was changed to add NULL elements to the array. It even looks as if you changed it :) I intentionally removed the code that populated return values with NULL's, to avoid inconsistencies. People should use the mysql_fetch_field() to check which fields there are

[PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

Err, as you say, PHP should make things easy. I don't see how making tell NULL from an undefined variable makes anything easier. At 15:49 3.5. 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote the following: -- >At 08:48 AM 5/3/2001 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wro

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 08:53 AM 5/3/2001 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote: >On Thu, 03 May 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: > > Yeah but I'm afraid it'll make scripts be written on behavior which > > shouldn't be counted on. > > Maybe in future versions of Zend $array['foo'] won't be defined. There are > > certain situations wh

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

On Thu, 03 May 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: > Yeah but I'm afraid it'll make scripts be written on behavior which > shouldn't be counted on. > Maybe in future versions of Zend $array['foo'] won't be defined. There are > certain situations where I think it was impossible to not define it so it > wa

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 08:48 AM 5/3/2001 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote: >On Thu, 03 May 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: > > >key_exists(), you mean? I didn't put it in, and as far as I know it's > > >still there. > > > > I'd really like to nuke it. > >I can sort of see his point really, if $array['foo'] = NULL there is no >

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 16:46 3/5/2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: >> > By the way, what happened to that array_defined() or whatever function >> > which was added? Didn't we say it should be nuked? isset() and empty() are >> > enough IMO especially as NULL is used as undefined. >> >>key_exists(), you mean? I didn't put it i

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

On Thu, 03 May 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: > >key_exists(), you mean? I didn't put it in, and as far as I know it's > >still there. > > I'd really like to nuke it. I can sort of see his point really, if $array['foo'] = NULL there is no way to know whether key 'foo' exists or not.. -Andrei * Power

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 08:45 AM 5/3/2001 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote: >On Thu, 03 May 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: > > Nah but I think it means that you shouldn't add any more array_foobar() > > functions before 4.0.7-dev :) > >Geez, just when I finished array_foobar().. :) > > By the way, what happened to that array

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

On Thu, 03 May 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: > Nah but I think it means that you shouldn't add any more array_foobar() > functions before 4.0.7-dev :) Geez, just when I finished array_foobar().. > By the way, what happened to that array_defined() or whatever function > which was added? Didn't we s

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 08:35 AM 5/3/2001 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote: >On Thu, 03 May 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > At 13:27 3/5/2001, Jani Taskinen wrote: > > >I just want to remind everyone that the 4.0.6 is suppose to have mainly > > >bug fixes..or wasn't this agreed on yet? > > > > Yes it was. > >Does that mean

[PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

On Thu, 03 May 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote: > At 13:27 3/5/2001, Jani Taskinen wrote: > >I just want to remind everyone that the 4.0.6 is suppose to have mainly > >bug fixes..or wasn't this agreed on yet? > > Yes it was. Does that mean I should take my array_map() and array_filter() functions out?

Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

[Oyvind Moll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] > * Stig Sæther Bakken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > | > | sunday's morning paper in Trondheim > > That won't be much of a name. > > > (...or has Adresseavisa started printing a Sunday edition?) That was of course supposed to be saturday. :-) - Stig -- Stig Sæth

Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

* Stig Sæther Bakken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | | sunday's morning paper in Trondheim That won't be much of a name. (...or has Adresseavisa started printing a Sunday edition?) -- Øyvind Møll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Initio IT-løsninger AS http://www.initio.no/ > -- PHP Developmen

Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

[Andi Gutmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] > At 05:52 AM 5/3/2001 -0400, Stig Sæther Bakken wrote: > >We'll always have the problem of "I need to MFH this, pretty please", > >but I think that started working well at the end of the 4.0.5 QA. :-) > > I actually also think that on a whole 4.0.5's release pr

Re: [PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 12:58 PM 5/3/2001 +0100, James Moore wrote: > > > > What's the status of the show stoppers list James put up? We > > > > should fix as > > > > many bugs as we can (at least those which are planned to be fixed > > > > in 4.0.6) > > > > before branching, to avoid having to synchronize two branch

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

> > > What's the status of the show stoppers list James put up? We > > > should fix as > > > many bugs as we can (at least those which are planned to be fixed > > > in 4.0.6) > > > before branching, to avoid having to synchronize two branches for > > > every bug > > > fix. > > > >Ill go through t

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 12:52 PM 5/3/2001 +0100, James Moore wrote: > > What's the status of the show stoppers list James put up? We > > should fix as > > many bugs as we can (at least those which are planned to be fixed > > in 4.0.6) > > before branching, to avoid having to synchronize two branches for > > every bu

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

> What's the status of the show stoppers list James put up? We > should fix as > many bugs as we can (at least those which are planned to be fixed > in 4.0.6) > before branching, to avoid having to synchronize two branches for > every bug > fix. Ill go through tonight and update list and post t

[PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 13:27 3/5/2001, Jani Taskinen wrote: >I just want to remind everyone that the 4.0.6 is suppose to have mainly >bug fixes..or wasn't this agreed on yet? Yes it was. Zeev -- PHP Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands,

Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

What's the status of the show stoppers list James put up? We should fix as many bugs as we can (at least those which are planned to be fixed in 4.0.6) before branching, to avoid having to synchronize two branches for every bug fix. Zeev At 13:04 3/5/2001, Andi Gutmans wrote: >At 05:52 AM 5/3

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

On Thu, 3 May 2001, Phil Driscoll wrote: >Andi wrote: >>That brings me to more current events. I'd like to roll an RC1 for 4.0.6 >>pretty soon (Saturday?). > >I don't want to slow things down here, and if Saturday can be achieved, all >well and good, but we perhaps ought to have a strong guidelin

[PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 11:16 AM 5/3/2001 +0100, Phil Driscoll wrote: >Andi wrote: > >That brings me to more current events. I'd like to roll an RC1 for 4.0.6 > >pretty soon (Saturday?). > >I don't want to slow things down here, and if Saturday can be achieved, all >well and good, but we perhaps ought to have a strong

[PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

Andi wrote: >That brings me to more current events. I'd like to roll an RC1 for 4.0.6 >pretty soon (Saturday?). I don't want to slow things down here, and if Saturday can be achieved, all well and good, but we perhaps ought to have a strong guideline that, say, 1 weeks warning of an impending RC

Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

At 05:52 AM 5/3/2001 -0400, Stig Sæther Bakken wrote: >We'll always have the problem of "I need to MFH this, pretty please", >but I think that started working well at the end of the 4.0.5 QA. :-) I actually also think that on a whole 4.0.5's release process was pretty good and a big improvement

Re: [PHP-DEV] Release process

[Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] > In an effort to stop a long going ping-pong again, let's concentrate > on figuring out what was wrong with the old release, and trying to > improve it in the future. > > I'll start by saying that generally, overall, the last release was > pretty good. Ok, so

[PHP-DEV] Release process

In an effort to stop a long going ping-pong again, let's concentrate on figuring out what was wrong with the old release, and trying to improve it in the future. I'll start by saying that generally, overall, the last release was pretty good. Ok, so COM didn't work, but only a very small numbe