It's been a bit quite in PHP SCA land of late but we have quite a lot
of new code now in the branch so I propose we start thinking about
getting a release out fairly soon. Looking at the code we now have
(and some of the holes :-) I think the release should include the
following:
Pluggable bindin
Hi Simon ,
I am new to SCA for PHP, I have installed the latest release (1.1.2)
using PECL, but it looks somehow (directory structure) different from
the Buzzard branch. So how can I get the new contents before the next
release is ready? Can I just download the new files and copy them
into my loc
I turned Simon's proposed list of contents for the next release into a
page here on this site so that anyone can hone it, track progress
within it, etc.
Click on http://groups.google.com/group/phpsoa/web/contents-of-1-1-3-release
- or copy & paste it into your browser's address bar if that doesn'
On 23 Apr, 11:25, Jack Zai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Simon ,
> I am new to SCA for PHP, I have installed the latest release (1.1.2)
> using PECL, but it looks somehow (directory structure) different from
> the Buzzard branch. So how can I get the new contents before the next
> release is r
On 23 Apr, 11:40, Matthew Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I turned Simon's proposed list of contents for the next release into a
> page here on this site so that anyone can hone it, track progress
> within it, etc.
>
> Click onhttp://groups.google.com/group/phpsoa/web/contents-of-1-1-3-relea
I think we should revisit this decision about working in a branch - I
think we have it the wrong way around. I think it would be more useful
if we developed in HEAD so that people automatically got the latest
dll, and the special case - the hard one - would be if people wanted
only the version tha
You'll see I made this list into a page, wiki-style, that we can
collaborate on and keep up to date.
Matthew
On Apr 23, 9:08 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It's been a bit quite in PHP SCA land of late but we have quite a lot
> of new code now in the branch so I propose we start thinking about
>
On 23 Apr, 14:04, Matthew Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I think we should revisit this decision about working in a branch - I
> think we have it the wrong way around. I think it would be more useful
> if we developed in HEAD so that people automatically got the latest
> dll, and the specia
On 23 Apr, 14:06, Matthew Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> You'll see I made this list into a page, wiki-style, that we can
> collaborate on and keep up to date.
>
> Matthew
>
> On Apr 23, 9:08 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > It's been a bit quite in PHP SCA land of late but we have quite
Matthew Peters wrote:
> I think we should revisit this decision about working in a branch - I
> think we have it the wrong way around. I think it would be more useful
> if we developed in HEAD so that people automatically got the latest
> dll, and the special case - the hard one - would be if peop
Commented on whether RSS is ready to go - I don't think so.
Listed where I think we are with the documentation.
Click on
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/phpsoa/web/contents-of-1-1-3-release?hl=en
- or copy & paste it into your browser's address bar if that doesn't
work.
--~--~-~--~---
I hadn't forgotten. Given how very difficult it is for anyone to build
on windows, it would be useful for anyone to be able to pick up the
latest from the latest automated build. I think the way it is now
actually makes it next to impossible for users. And they could pick up
the released one from
Simon, not sure what you're intending here. You're actually describing
the process for building on Windows, which I doubt would be the
default for most users, because it is so much more complicated than
building on *IX. Are you also intending to describe the normal
phpize;./configure;make process
On 23 Apr, 15:49, cem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Simon, not sure what you're intending here. You're actually describing
> the process for building on Windows, which I doubt would be the
> default for most users, because it is so much more complicated than
> building on *IX. Are you also intend
I don't think they are that complex, but they aren't exactly simple
either. Is there a place I can post/email them for you to view and
see if you get the same thing? They are really too large to do it in
this post.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this messag
I got the buzzard branch from cvs and installed it but the Tuscany sdo
cpp version is still 00:09:0004, which is the version that my 1.1.2
version on my production server shows. Did the version number not get
updated correctly?
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received
cdouglas wrote:
> I got the buzzard branch from cvs and installed it but the Tuscany sdo
> cpp version is still 00:09:0004, which is the version that my 1.1.2
> version on my production server shows. Did the version number not get
> updated correctly?
Chris, it's quite rare for the cpp version nu
thanks
I will try it and see if I still get memory leaks.
On 23 Apr, 11:16, Caroline Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> cdouglas wrote:
> > I got the buzzard branch from cvs and installed it but the Tuscany sdo
> > cpp version is still 00:09:0004, which is the version that my 1.1.2
> > versi
18 matches
Mail list logo
