RE: [PECL-DEV] Prefixing names of new filter functions with filter_

Ilia, We haven't been "shipping" this extension. RC's are not considered to be shipping, they never have and never should be. How can you think of shipping something when you know you'll need to clutter the symbol table with non-coding standard names which you plan to alias in the next release? I think as release manager if you know you're going to ship something which you need to BC-fix in the next mini release then it shouldn't ship. In that case, if you don't want to ship without ext/filter I suggest one more RC. Frustrating, sure? But you shouldn't let frustrating get to your release quality judgment. Andi > -----Original Message----- > From: Ilia Alshanetsky [mailto:iliaal@gmail.com] On Behalf Of > Ilia Alshanetsky > Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 8:10 AM > To: Andi Gutmans > Cc: 'Derick Rethans'; 'Dan Scott'; 'PECL' > Subject: Re: [PECL-DEV] Prefixing names of new filter > functions with filter_ > > > On 14-Sep-06, at 5:44 PM, Andi Gutmans wrote: > > As we have yet to bundle ext/filter I suggest to not bundle it in > > 5.2.0, take a week or two to finalize the extension, and ship it in > > 5.2.1. > > If there > > are any binary compatibility patches in the core, we could > keep those > > in and just not use them until 5.2.1 is shipped. > > I think it would be a big loss for us to shop 5.2.0 without > the filter extension, which IMHO is a major security > enhancement for PHP and one the "big" things why would > someone upgrade to 5.2 would go away if we don't include > filter. Also, as Pierre had correctly mention, we've already > been shipping PHP with this extension for 3 RCs. Since we've > all made the decision to include filter (right or > wrong) we need to retain this functionality. > > Ilia Alshanetsky > > > >