Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3 mbstring patch?

Additional note, since it seems it's misleading. Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: This is one of the reason why we should *enable* mbstring by default i.e. discover sloppy patches to it. The bug was introduced between 4.2.2 and 4.2.3. -- Yasuo Ohgaki -- PHP Development Mailing List

RE: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3 mbstring patch?

> -Original Message- > From: Yasuo Ohgaki [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 19 November 2002 10:19 > > Andrei Zmievski wrote: > > On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, lowbwtom wrote: > > > >>Will there be a patch to fix the mbstring bug in 4.2.3? Any > idea when? > >>(specifically to fix the missing 4

Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3 mbstring patch?

Andrei Zmievski wrote: On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, lowbwtom wrote: Will there be a patch to fix the mbstring bug in 4.2.3? Any idea when? (specifically to fix the missing 4 characters in array posts) Some of us have been totally screwed by this bug - since our isp's have updated to 4.2.3 and left ever

Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3 mbstring patch?

On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, lowbwtom wrote: > Will there be a patch to fix the mbstring bug in 4.2.3? Any idea when? > (specifically to fix the missing 4 characters in array posts) > > Some of us have been totally screwed by this bug - since our isp's have > updated to 4.2.3 and left everyone's sites tot

Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3 mbstring patch?

On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, lowbwtom wrote: > Will there be a patch to fix the mbstring bug in 4.2.3? Any idea when? > (specifically to fix the missing 4 characters in array posts) > > Some of us have been totally screwed by this bug - since our isp's have > updated to 4.2.3 and left everyone's sites to

Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3 mbstring patch?

On Thursday 14 November 2002 07:10, lowbwtom wrote: > Will there be a patch to fix the mbstring bug in 4.2.3? Any idea when? > (specifically to fix the missing 4 characters in array posts) This bug is definitely a show-stopper. There are _many_ PHP-applications out there that use arrays in forms,

Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

On Thu, 22 Aug 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: > I'll pack 4.2.3RC1 tomorrow morning, so if anybody has any last minute bug > fixes to put in, now's the time! Shuffle fix didn't make it: http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=18401 -adam -- adam maccabee trachtenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PHP Developme

Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

Any of you who have done some 64bit fixes, may want to check the PHP_4_2_0 branch out and ensure that they are backported. A number of commits went on in CVS, and not all of them mention if they fix compile errors for 64bit platforms or only for 32bit (or even both). Anyhow just look. On Thu, 2

RE: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

> -Original Message- > From: Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, August 19, 2002 9:20 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3 > > > At 10:22 19/08/20

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

At 10:22 19/08/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > > At 10:15 19/08/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > I would actually like to do that once, if you don't mind :) > > > > > >I don't mind at all... but what is the reason for this? :) > > > > Well, first

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: > At 10:15 19/08/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > I would actually like to do that once, if you don't mind :) > > > >I don't mind at all... but what is the reason for this? :) > > Well, first it's been a while since I did, but I'd also like to see it

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

At 10:15 19/08/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I would actually like to do that once, if you don't mind :) > >I don't mind at all... but what is the reason for this? :) Well, first it's been a while since I did, but I'd also like to see it working in the 'new way' once, with the automated QA.

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: > At 10:12 19/08/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >I'd like to hear Stig's opinion on 4.3.0 first, and I tend to agree that > >we need a 4.2.3 too. I can even find time to do the release process and > >manage QA, providing there is any feedback to the RC.

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

At 10:12 19/08/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >I'd like to hear Stig's opinion on 4.3.0 first, and I tend to agree that >we need a 4.2.3 too. I can even find time to do the release process and >manage QA, providing there is any feedback to the RC. I would actually like to do that once, if you don

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

On Sun, 18 Aug 2002, Edin Kadribasic wrote: > Exactly right. During the last release cycle, Derick made elaborate test > cases, etc. but the result was not very promising. Very few people actually > took part in the QA process and as a result 4.2.0 was released with some > serious bugs in it. >

[PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

At 22:21 18-8-2002, Edin Kadribasic wrote: > > >As long as there is momentum on the development process and on the QA > > >process when needed, > > >I don't think release momentum matters that much. > > > > Right. Since the first part of the sentence does not stand in reality, >the > > direct r

RE: [PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] RE: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

> From: Melvyn Sopacua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > At 18:19 17-8-2002, Liz wrote: > > > > there should be 'fixed in the next bug-fix release' or 'fixed > > > in the next > > > semi-major release'. > > > >How about > > > >Will be fixed in version major.minor.buildrelease ?? ie tell them which

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

ge- > From: Edin Kadribasic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sun 18/08/2002 4:21 PM > To: Xavier Spriet; Zeev Suraski > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3 > > > >

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

ive it some momentum ;) -Original Message- From: Edin Kadribasic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sun 18/08/2002 4:21 PM To: Xavier Spriet; Zeev Suraski Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PHP-QA]

[PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

> >As long as there is momentum on the development process and on the QA > >process when needed, > >I don't think release momentum matters that much. > > Right. Since the first part of the sentence does not stand in reality, the > direct result is that momentum matters, a lot :) Lack of momentum

Re: [PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

> Lack of momentum > is the main reason PHP releases are taking several weeks now. It's not > as if people are testing it thoroughly for weeks and weeks... I have a dev box I can test my installation setup on with dev releases of PHP ... where do I sign up? (If needed) -- Dan Hardiker [[EMA

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

At 22:20 18/08/2002, Xavier Spriet wrote: >As long as there is momentum on the development process and on the QA >process when needed, >I don't think release momentum matters that much. Right. Since the first part of the sentence does not stand in reality, the direct result is that momentum ma

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3 I did not intend to reply to that, but generally, the reasons I think 4.2.3 should either be released in the immediate future or not released at all are (a) clashing with the 4.3.0 release process (b) momentum. The most

Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

I did not intend to reply to that, but generally, the reasons I think 4.2.3 should either be released in the immediate future or not released at all are (a) clashing with the 4.3.0 release process (b) momentum. The most serious problem PHP releases have suffered from, in my opinion, ever sense

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] RE: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

At 18:19 17-8-2002, Liz wrote: > > there should be 'fixed in the next bug-fix release' or 'fixed > > in the next > > semi-major release'. > >How about > >Will be fixed in version major.minor.buildrelease ?? ie tell them which >version it will be fixed in, no confusion at all then Actually - It's

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Sascha Schumann wrote: > > I think 4.2.3 makes perfect sense as long as it gets started immediately, > > immediately being sometime within the next few days. > > Is there some event I'm not aware of that a few days matter > to you? If not, I don't see any problem wi

RE: [PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

> -Original Message- > From: Sascha Schumann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2002 11:19 PM > To: Zeev Suraski > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3 > Well, my primary workstati

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

> -Original Message- > From: Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2002 10:06 PM > To: Sascha Schumann > Cc: Xavier Spriet; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3 > > > At 22:58 17/08/

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

At 00:18 18/08/2002, Sascha Schumann wrote: > I've had at a look at the bug reports Sebastian Nohn pointed > out. None of these are major issues. Annoying, but nothing > which would qualify PHP as being "buggy as hell". Still, > having these fixes in 4.2.3 would be a definitive

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

lto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sat 17/08/2002 5:18 PM To: Zeev Suraski Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3 On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: > At 22:58 17/08/2002

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

: Xavier Spriet; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3 At 22:58 17/08/2002, Sascha Schumann wrote: > > 64-bit fixes (for whatever reason), I think that's quite alright. 64-bit > > suppor

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: > At 22:58 17/08/2002, Sascha Schumann wrote: > > > 64-bit fixes (for whatever reason), I think that's quite alright. 64-bit > > > support is a major thing, which people, especially businesses, will not > > > really expect to be implemented in a bug-fix r

Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

Original Message- > From: Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sat 17/08/2002 11:37 AM > To: Rasmus Lerdorf > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3 > > > >

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

At 22:58 17/08/2002, Sascha Schumann wrote: > > 64-bit fixes (for whatever reason), I think that's quite alright. 64-bit > > support is a major thing, which people, especially businesses, will not > > really expect to be implemented in a bug-fix release. > > 64-bit support has worked for year

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

> 64-bit fixes (for whatever reason), I think that's quite alright. 64-bit > support is a major thing, which people, especially businesses, will not > really expect to be implemented in a bug-fix release. 64-bit support has worked for years in PHP -- it is not new or a 'major thing'. As

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

At 22:28 17/08/2002, Xavier Spriet wrote: >This is quiteconcerning. >It appears the PHP release process is not suited to the way PHP is >developed anymore >and this can lead in severe inconsistencies. >What seemed to have happened is that several bugfixes were fixed in CVS >instead of the bugfix

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sat 17/08/2002 11:37 AM To: Rasmus Lerdorf Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3 It's not a matter of what we call it

Re: [PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] RE: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

Because we aren't always sure what the next version will be. Witness the 4.0.6-4.0.7/4.1 release process. On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Liz wrote: > > there should be 'fixed in the next bug-fix release' or 'fixed > > in the next > > semi-major release'. > > How about > > Will be fixed in version major

Re: [PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] RE: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

Isnt this what a bug/change log is for... If its not in the change log it wasnt put in yet. Just add a small comment at the top. "Not all changes currently in CVS may be in this release due to blah blah blah contraints" On Sat, 2002-08-17 at 11:19, Liz wrote: > > there should be 'fixed in the ne

[PHP-DEV] RE: [PHP-QA] RE: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

> there should be 'fixed in the next bug-fix release' or 'fixed > in the next > semi-major release'. How about Will be fixed in version major.minor.buildrelease ?? ie tell them which version it will be fixed in, no confusion at all then -- PHP Development Mailing List

Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

It's not a matter of what we call it - I thought it would make sense to release a new version based on the 4.2 branch, because 4.3 has TONS of new features and is thus very likely to introduce new inconsistencies and bugs. As people have said here several times in the last few weeks, most use

Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

Regardless of what we call it, we need to light a fire under people to get a new release out. The fixes are piling up in CVS. Stig, could you give us a status report? Do you still have time to push this release? -R On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: > Ok then, I retract my suggestion t

[PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] RE: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

At 17:52 17/08/2002, Sebastian Nohn wrote: >No! This simply confuses users! Someone reported a bug n weeks ago, this bug >"has been fixed in CVS" n-x weeks ago. Now there is a new release an WOW! >this bug is'nt fixed! Fixed in CVS means fixed in CVS and the user expects >this bug to be fixed in t

Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

Ok then, I retract my suggestion to release 4.2.3. Zeev At 17:59 17/08/2002, Dan Kalowsky wrote: >I disagree that it should go out as is, very strongly at that too. > >Some fixes not in the 4.2 branches: > >- ODBC no longer crashes on Windows upon unloading >- while not fully tested, ext/java no

[PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Dan Kalowsky wrote: > I disagree that it should go out as is, very strongly at that too. I agree with Dan here. - Sascha -- PHP Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

RE: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: > PHP x.y.z has known bugs that are not fixed, for any given x, y and z, > since forever, and until the of time. Realize that, and decisions become > much simpler. Yes, but again many of these fixes were not applied to the 4_2 Branch because we had been

Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

I disagree that it should go out as is, very strongly at that too. Some fixes not in the 4.2 branches: - ODBC no longer crashes on Windows upon unloading - while not fully tested, ext/java now works for 1.4 JDK's - various memory leak fixes provied by Ilia (pack being one of them) - a few misc f

RE: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

Hi, > At 16:41 17/08/2002, Sebastian Nohn wrote: > >Why release a RC for a software that has some known bugs not fixed. > > PHP x.y.z has known bugs that are not fixed, for any given x, y and z, > since forever, and until the of time. Realize that, and decisions become > much simpler. > > Releas

RE: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

At 16:41 17/08/2002, Sebastian Nohn wrote: >Why release a RC for a software that has some known bugs not fixed. PHP x.y.z has known bugs that are not fixed, for any given x, y and z, since forever, and until the of time. Realize that, and decisions become much simpler. Releasing a new version

Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

I think it makes good sense to release 4.2.3 as-is (after a short QA cycle, that will ensure we didn't introduce any new bugs). If 4.2.3 becomes a larger project, with more pre-requisites, I don't see it happening ("if it will not be simple, it will simply not be"). The last time around 4.2.3

Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

> I'd like to raise the option of releasing 4.2.3 again. I believe that it > would be quite a while before 4.3.0 is out, and there are quite a few fixes > in the 4.2 branch that should make the userbase as soon as possible, > especially the Windows userbase. > I think that releasing 4.2.3 can be

Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

I have to disagree, a LOT of bug fixes have gone in. Honest I can run through the list of things I think should be done, and a list of things that I think should be back ported. None of it is new functionality, all of it is fixes to bugs. And I still think the Tru64/AIX issues will need to be s

RE: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

Why release a RC for a software that has some known bugs not fixed. This leads to a RC1, RC2, RC3 and so on. If you only want to fix thw windows bugs you stated, a 4.2.3 would be useless to me, in this case I vote against a 4.2.3 as this would delay 4.3.0 just a little bit more. > From: Zeev Sura

Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

I'd really like to avoid waiting this time, though (the enemy of good is better...). Even if we release 4.2.3 as it is in the branch, without any further fixes, it's significantly better than 4.2.2. Translating this into action - my personal preference is to release the RC as early as tomorro

Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

Hrm, well a lot of the fixes I've been doing have only gone to head because the belief of no 4.2.3. There are still a few outstanding bugs I'd like to see fixed before things we RC. Sfox and I (mostly her though) have been looking at the dbm_* functionality on Windows. We're questioning if it e

RE: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

Hi, > I'd like to raise the option of releasing 4.2.3 again. I believe that it > would be quite a while before 4.3.0 is out, and there are quite a > few fixes > in the 4.2 branch that should make the userbase as soon as possible, > especially the Windows userbase. > I think that releasing 4.2.3

Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.2.3

On Sat, Aug 17, 2002 at 01:47:19PM +0300, Zeev Suraski wrote: > I'd like to raise the option of releasing 4.2.3 again. I believe that it > would be quite a while before 4.3.0 is out, and there are quite a few fixes > in the 4.2 branch that should make the userbase as soon as possible, > especi