Re: Re: cvs: php4 /sapi/cgi cgi_main.c /sapi/cli php_cli.c

On Sat, 11 May 2002, Markus Fischer wrote: > > Someone came up that it may be a use for PECL modules (or any > C extension) which relies on a certain API number. Maybe Stig > can see a use for it? Blame Derick who came up with the idea > (I think ? :-) *hides*. I'm still not buying it. If future modules are dependent upon a specific version of PHP to work, that version will more than likely be the PHP version. I don't see how the API number is going to effect any development. > Multiple version of any of those mentioned API numbers are > not possible per release (it's only a #define, nothing more). My point exactly. > Which standard ? :) Anyway, It's quite common to have > multiple occurences of the same option additionally enhance > the option, e.g. rpm: > > $ rpm --help|grep verbose > -v - be a little more verbose > -vv - be incredibly verbose (for debugging) A "de facto" standard stating -v is for version information. And please PLEASE don't use RPM as a model for software development. So far that is the first time I've ever seen the -vv option. Look against things like gcc, sendmail, and a multitude of other cross-platform tools. -v is what people have to expect for version statistics. > Btw, jimw has activated the new anti-spam feature also for > user@php.net adressed (just in case ... ) Why build a house on the river delta, knowing the river floods, when I can build on the high grounds and be safer? AKA I'd rather not stop spam at the receiving level, but rather at the sending level. >---------------------------------------------------------------< Dan Kalowsky "The record shows, I took the blows. http://www.deadmime.org/~dank And did it my way." dank@nospam-deadmime.org - "My Way", Frank Sinatra kalowsky@nospam-php.net