On Sun, 24 Jun 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> It is not huge amount of work but we should agree on php-dev first about
> what the version number will look like both number wise and format wise,
> i.e. string vs. integer, 1.0.3 vs. 2001008. Probably the latter date is
> more useful in this context.
At 06:26 AM 6/24/2001 +0200, Jani Taskinen wrote:
>On Sun, 24 Jun 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote:
>
> >I think we should also consider saving the version in the extension
> >structure and having generic function such as extension_version("xml").
> >This would save us from having to bloat PHP by adding a
On Sun, 24 Jun 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote:
>I think we should also consider saving the version in the extension
>structure and having generic function such as extension_version("xml").
>This would save us from having to bloat PHP by adding a foo_version()
>function to all extensions.
Just add one
At 02:38 PM 6/24/2001 +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Sun, 24 Jun 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote:
>
> > I think we should also consider saving the version in the extension
> > structure and having generic function such as extension_version("xml").
> > This would save us from having to bloat PHP by
On Sun, 24 Jun 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> I think we should also consider saving the version in the extension
> structure and having generic function such as extension_version("xml").
> This would save us from having to bloat PHP by adding a foo_version()
> function to all extensions.
andi,
t
I think we should also consider saving the version in the extension
structure and having generic function such as extension_version("xml").
This would save us from having to bloat PHP by adding a foo_version()
function to all extensions.
Andi
At 11:46 AM 6/24/2001 +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wro
