Re: PHP_CompatInfo unofficial 1.1.0 needs testers

Just to answer to your questions Pierre, on this mail Pierre a écrit :

On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 23:54:58 +0200 pear@laurent-laville.org (Laurent Laville) wrote:

Hi all, I keep aware in past QA / Davey for PHP_CompatInfo 1.0.0 (stable) [2005-03-15] to apply a fixe to make it really GOOD detection for PHP 4 script.

I must have missed your mail on the QA list. Can you point us to it please? I also watched all opened bugs, I see no trace of patches or comments from you, except in #7813, which is yours :) Of course i didn't post any bugs for PHP_CompatInfo in past, because i didn't have time to parse the source code and see why and where come the dysfunctional, until my post on QA mailing list on 2006-03-08.

Archive is : http://beeblex.com/lists/index.php/php.pear.qa/3601?s=l%3Aphp.pear.qa Associated with my own thinking about the tokenizer problem (inside the same mail, see link)

Nothing was made, so i've decided to write it myself, and the solution is behind bug #7813: wrong PHP minimum version detection [1] Just in case Pierre ask me again to post something in bug tracker ;-) It's already done !

A bug report, great :) I wonder however where are your first post, bug or mails. My first mail should be on 2006-01-14

http://beeblex.com/lists/index.php/php.pear.general/22533?s=php_compatinfo But finally, after thinking, even if tokenizer version and PHP is source of problem, implementation with token integer code gave us the major problem. Here is why, if 've used token_name( int code) in my version. Only few lines must be change, without others aspects (QA).

Today i ask to all volunteers to test the new un-official version (1.1.0) under your own platform, and give your feedback.

There is no unofficial versions of packages. If you like to take the hand, please step in, using the well known procedure: mail pear-qa and get an OK. I'm also pretty sure that Davey will have no obejction to get someone else on board (I cc'ed him). I do not want to be too procedural, however there is easy steps to follow to get what you want, just do it :) Davey, it's for you: do you think to write a package documentation ? Remember its on a stable status

Sorry if it's me this time to be too procedural, but i think it's really necessary

I think that Davey package is so good, that it will be horrible to let it down for so few (error and fixes) to do. If you're as myself in plan to use it again, it's now up-to-you to change the package future !

Again, that is not how things work. If the package is orphaned, you can take the hand on it. If it is not, a couple of weeks Thanks for your work, -- Pierre Thanks for your attention

Laurent