Re: [PHP4BETA] PHP4 Betas
| From: | Rasmus Lerdorf | Date: | Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [PHP4BETA] PHP4 Betas | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.version4 |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-version4+get-5801@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
> I'll take that as a "Probably fixed, but not 100% sure".
>
> I think I'll wait for the upcoming beta release - if I grab the CVS now,
> I'll probably start poking around in the code and fixing stuff. ;)
> (I *do* want to help; I just don't have much time at the moment).
>
> Please don't take this the wrong way, but I was expecting a "yes/no/not
> sure" kind of answer, or for verification via the supplied test script...
> (although if Oracle is an uncommon configuration, I understand).
>
> Strangely, I got a similar response on a bug I filed regarding the
> ora_connect() function (BugId #2537); and while I don't believe the
> maintainter ran the test script, the bug was closed nonetheless. I don't
> mind for the bug to have low priority, but is it normal behaviour here to
> *close* a bug under such circumstances ?
The main issue here is that there were a lot of things broken in beta2 and
we are so close to a beta3 that very few of the bug reports based on beta2
are of any use to us at this point. There have been *a lot* of changes
since beta2. At this point, if you want someone to pay attention to a bug
report, you really need to file it against current cvs, or at least a
snapshot less than a month old. That doesn't mean we ignore others, but
most of the stuff files against beta2 has been fixed.
-Rasmus