On Apr 3, 2010, at 7:38 AM, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 05:14, Philip Olson wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> Please have a look at the proposed patch, which is attached to the following
>> bug report:
>>
>> - http://bugs.php.net/51468
>>
>> I'll apply it after the weeken
On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 05:14, Philip Olson wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> Please have a look at the proposed patch, which is attached to the following
> bug report:
>
> - http://bugs.php.net/51468
>
> I'll apply it after the weekend unless something is found that needs changed.
> It hides most PH
Hello everyone,
Please have a look at the proposed patch, which is attached to the following
bug report:
- http://bugs.php.net/51468
I'll apply it after the weekend unless something is found that needs changed.
It hides most PHP 6 documentation, implements "FIXME PHP_6 ..." todo items, and
u
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 17:55, Philip Olson wrote:
> On Mar 31, 2010, at 7:48 AM, Adam Harvey wrote:
>
>> On 31 March 2010 22:25, Christopher Jones
>> wrote:
>>> It's not clear if/how these features are going to be re-included.
>>>
>>> I'd prefer to see them commented out. Displaying mis-inform
Hi!
(a) Remove or comment out the docs (a sad thought)
(b) Make guesses as to which PHP version they'll be in (5.4 is likely for
many, but easily wrong)
(c) Move them to an appendix (doesn't feel right)
(d) Write "Future PHP Release" or similar until we know (seems okay)
(e) ...
con
On Mar 31, 2010, at 7:48 AM, Adam Harvey wrote:
> On 31 March 2010 22:25, Christopher Jones
> wrote:
>> It's not clear if/how these features are going to be re-included.
>>
>> I'd prefer to see them commented out. Displaying mis-information is
>> harmful to the overall PHP project.
>
> Agreed
On 31 March 2010 22:25, Christopher Jones wrote:
> It's not clear if/how these features are going to be re-included.
>
> I'd prefer to see them commented out. Displaying mis-information is
> harmful to the overall PHP project.
Agreed. We can always reincorporate documentation for any features
th
On 31 March 2010 15:25, Christopher Jones wrote:
>
>
> On 03/31/2010 03:13 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010, Philip Olson wrote:
>>
>>> Hello everyone,
>>>
>>> As most of us know, PHP 6 has disappeared. It used to be 5.3+unicode
>>> but now it's unknown and certainly not worth
On 03/31/2010 03:13 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Tue, 30 Mar 2010, Philip Olson wrote:
Hello everyone,
As most of us know, PHP 6 has disappeared. It used to be 5.3+unicode
but now it's unknown and certainly not worth mentioning in the PHP
manual (at least, as a version that introduces feat
On Tue, 30 Mar 2010, Philip Olson wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> As most of us know, PHP 6 has disappeared. It used to be 5.3+unicode
> but now it's unknown and certainly not worth mentioning in the PHP
> manual (at least, as a version that introduces features/changes).
> With that said, let's talk
On 31 March 2010 10:27, Daniel Egeberg wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 09:16, Jordi Boggiano wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Philip Olson wrote:
>>> (d) Write "Future PHP Release" or similar until we know (seems okay)
>>>
>>> I lean towards (d) for most cases. Thoughts?
>>
>> I'd al
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 09:16, Jordi Boggiano wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Philip Olson wrote:
>> (d) Write "Future PHP Release" or similar until we know (seems okay)
>>
>> I lean towards (d) for most cases. Thoughts?
>
> I'd also prefer D since it is the easiest to search & replace
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Philip Olson wrote:
> (d) Write "Future PHP Release" or similar until we know (seems okay)
>
> I lean towards (d) for most cases. Thoughts?
I'd also prefer D since it is the easiest to search & replace once
decisions are made. I think however that instead of Futu
13 matches
Mail list logo
