Re: __getStatic

On 01.01.2009, at 17:55, Pierre Joye wrote:

hi! On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Marcus Boerger <helly@php.net> wrote:

Hello Lukas, if anything requires an internal API change than we at least should do those parts. Besides this issue was long ago raised and imo should go in. As we get more and more people testing what 5.3 will be we get more and more complains about the lack of these. And isn't that the goal of an alpha verison as well?

Agreed. We should actually do a feature freeze after the 1st beta/RC. However, issues like this one should be fixed too after beta/RC, it would be bad to introduce new inconsistencies, saw them during the RC phase but leave them in only because we are in the RC. and best wishes for 2k9! :)

@Marcus: Like I said its a question of someone writing the code .. Timm proposed a patch which Stas thought had issues and then nobody picked things up .. @Pierre/all: Well we did announce something like a freeze. Of course there are still changes going in undiscussed and for the most part this is ok (and not doing those changes would be a bad idea and unnecessary to be delayed). However I would really appreciate it if people would really think about the changes they are doing. Think twice about changes that can introduce a regression or a lot of work and ask if the change has any change of being problematic. In this light the dl() change by Marcus (AFAIK this was planned and done for 6.0 and not 5.3) and the windows PCRE change by Andi seem potential candidates for regressions, issues and maybe should have been discussed beforehand. Just using these two has an example since they are the two last commits I marked as potential issues. BTW: I was planning on sending out a mail on Monday about beta1. Johannes and I feel like a release on the 20th or 22nd seems realistic. regards, Lukas Kahwe Smith mls@pooteeweet.org