Re: 5 or 6?
| From: | Antony Dovgal | Date: | Thu, 31 May 2007 09:38:34 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: 5 or 6? | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-29994@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On 31.05.2007 13:25, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
Antony Dovgal wrote:Because this is how it works for years? I do agree that having version number in file names is bad idea, but we need to think it over very good, since I don't like changing a behaviour which existed for ages, even if it looks stupid. -- Wbr, Antony DovgalOn 31.05.2007 13:04, Jani Taskinen wrote:Why should you be able to do this for two different major versions, but not for arbitrary minor versions or even configurations?Antony Dovgal kirjoitti:Well, you might want to have both libphp5.so and libphp6.so installed, but only one of them enabled.On 31.05.2007 03:29, Jani Taskinen wrote:You chose just the right example! Now, can you tell why it is necessary? And remember, everything is possible..there is no impossible here, we're having a totally new major version and everything.The whole idea of having that number there is pretty stupid..why not just remove them altogether..?Well, in some places it's just not possible, like libphp6.so etc.