Re: Re: cvs: php-src /ext/date...

Hey Steph and all, I agreed to make life easier on Derick who didn't want to maintain the patch outside of CVS, mainly because there were some bug fixes mixed in with it. I didn't realize this would cause havoc. It was definitely not a political move on my part (I'm not involved in any of the Date stuff except for some feedback I sent to the list). Derick did bring the API to this list and besides the OO recommendation I didn't see much pushback. I suggest that if people have issues with the API, then it's a good time to bring them up and discuss them. We can refrain from uncommenting that code until we reach an agreement. Andi At 03:09 PM 7/21/2005 +0100, Steph wrote:

All, I know I haven't much sway here, but... No disrespect to either Andi or Derick, I just want to register publicly my opinion that putting contentious code into CVS HEAD, even out-commented, sets a worrying precedent. There may well still be 'room for change and discussion', but once it's in CVS it is fairly obvious that this solution is going to be more favoured than any other potential approach. It says the discussion is over. If this is isolated code, surely it shouldn't be too difficult to maintain it elsewhere? I can't see this commit as anything other than a political decision, and it makes me very uneasy. Please - any dev - feel free to explain how I'm seeing it all wrong, preferably in words of one syllable. (Derick: polite ones? ;) - Steph ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andi Gutmans" <andi@zend.com> To: "Pierre-Alain Joye" <pierre@dotgeek.org>; <internals@lists.php.net> Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 4:31 PM Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-CVS] cvs: php-src /ext/date... Guys, Regarding Derick's commit, it's a very technical matter. It's commented and not enabled. Now new features crept in and after reviewing the patch, I felt that it's not dangerous nor complicated to let it sit in CVS commented. As you can see it's very isolated code so there's still room for change & discussion. Now to a more important issue than technicality of where code sits: I'll say it again. You should really work as a team and come with the best solution that will benefit the PHP community! Development is typically a 1+1=3 equation. The end result of a small team is better than that of an individual. Guys, work together!@#! You'll get the best results and ultimately our goal is to provide the best solutions to PHP users, not spend time in politics and on ego trips. I'm not going to play policeman (and I shouldn't). You guys really have to work it out together... Andi At 11:13 AM 7/20/2005 +0200, Pierre-Alain Joye wrote:

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 10:40:20 +0200 edink@emini.dk (Edin Kadribasic) wrote:

Derick, Didn't we agree not to do this until 5.1 was released? Please revert the object support.

Derick told me on IRC that he agreed on that with Andi. I still think that we should not expose the new lib now. It is far too early. I said that I will post the specs 10 days ago, sorry about that, got other problems to solve (various php4.4 problems like segfaults and some more urgent sec fixes in various packages...). But the fact that we agreed to do not expose it using new APIs before 5.1 branched and back to real -dev is still valid. Again, please revert. --Pierre -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

-- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php