Thread: Re: Strategy
Brought to you by:
iridium
Menu
▾
▴
phpweather-devel
|
From: Ray v. B. <r_v...@ho...> - 2002-03-15 15:24:35
|
> > What's important is that the way I'm writing stuff at the moment > > relys on people having PHP4 - for example I used foreach(). I think > > it's reasonable now to expect people to have php4. Any comments? > >It would surely make things a lot easier if we require PHP4. And now >that PHP4 has been out for over 2 years I don't think it's too much to >ask of people, that they upgrade to the new and improved version from >PHP version 3. Eh, sorry guys, my provider has two types of accounts: - the low cost with php3, no mysql, low bandwidth, little disk space - the high cost with php4, mysql high bandwidth, lots of disk space I can't afford the high cost account type so I stick with the low cost type. Someone in this list suggested a while a go to persuade my provider to get php4, but the only answer I got is: "No, I will not install php4, but you can get the high cost account". I guess a lot of people are in this situation. So therefor I would strongly recommend not to dispose the php3 code. Ray _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com |
|
From: Ray v. B. <r_v...@ho...> - 2002-03-15 16:02:03
|
Max, >My feeling is that you're in a minority here - I think that most hosts >have upgraded by now. >It's a balance of where our priorities lie - continue with the old code, >or work on the new. PHPWeather 2 is really quite a bit better than the 1.x >branch. Oh, but I agree that PHPWeather 2 is a lot better (although I haven't seen it yet ;-). And of course it is great that it is being developed further.... >I'd like to develop it using the tools that are available. .. and of course you want to use the tools that are available, but does that refrain you from using php3? I'm a php-newbie, so you have to tell me: Does the use of php3 'impossiblelize' (can't find another word ;-) the new and better functionality you had in mind for PHPWeather 2? If so, then I surrender and say "go ahead, I'll stay behind". No hard feelings though. ;-) Greetz, Ray _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx |
|
From: Martin G. <gim...@gi...> - 2002-03-15 16:43:36
|
"Ray van Beek" <r_v...@ho...> writes: > Max, >=20 >>My feeling is that you're in a minority here - I think that most hosts >>have upgraded by now. >=20 >>It's a balance of where our priorities lie - continue with the old code, >>or work on the new. PHPWeather 2 is really quite a bit better than the 1.x >>branch. >=20 > Oh, but I agree that PHPWeather 2 is a lot better (although I > haven't seen it yet ;-). By PHP Weather 2, I think (hope) he means the code you'll find in CVS under the module 'phpweather'. It has some nice things, including much better support for different databases (or no database at all), more detailed parsing of the METAR, an improved internationalization-framework (wow - that was a lot of expensive words in one sentence :-) > And of course it is great that it is being developed further.... >=20 >>I'd like to develop it using the tools that are available. >=20 > . and of course you want to use the tools that are available, but > does that refrain you from using php3? PHP4 is faster and better, bla, bla... Seriously, there's a whole bunch of nice functions for dealings with arrays. I also believe that PHP4 has better support for objects (which is used in PHP Weather 2) > I'm a php-newbie, so you have to tell me: Does the use of php3 > 'impossiblelize' (can't find another word ;-) the new and better > functionality you had in mind for PHP Weather 2? Well, the code in CVS doesn't run on PHP3 as it is right now - you should try and have a look at it. I'm not sure why, I only know that it didn't run last someone tried it on PHP3. =20 > If so, then I surrender and say "go ahead, I'll stay behind". No > hard feelings though. ;-) OK.=20 =2D-=20 Martin Geisler My GnuPG Key: 0xF7F6B57B See my homepage at http://www.gimpster.com/ for: PHP Weather =3D> Shows the current weather on your webpage. PHP Shell =3D> A telnet-connection (almost :-) in a PHP page. |
|
From: Max H. <ma...@fl...> - 2002-03-16 11:54:24
|
Hi all, > >I'd like to develop it using the tools that are available. > > .. and of course you want to use the tools that are available, > but does that > refrain you from using php3? I'm a php-newbie, so you have to > tell me: Does the use of php3 'impossiblelize' (can't find another word ;-) > the new and better functionality you had in mind for PHPWeather 2? PHP4 does many things a lot better than php3. We can write cleaner, faster code more easily, and use functions to save so much time. (eg foreach() or include_once(). It's not impossible to write good code that is compatible with 3, but I just don't think it's worth it any more. > If so, then I surrender and say "go ahead, I'll stay behind". No hard > feelings though. ;-) Your host will eventually have to upgrade; or you can find a better one. Mention the serious security hole in PHP and that they've got the choice to reinstall a new version of 3, or go to 4.. Max |
|
From: Max H. <ma...@fl...> - 2002-03-15 15:41:44
|
Hi Ray, > > > What's important is that the way I'm writing stuff at the moment > > > relys on people having PHP4 - for example I used foreach(). I think > > > it's reasonable now to expect people to have php4. Any comments? > > > >It would surely make things a lot easier if we require PHP4. And now > >that PHP4 has been out for over 2 years I don't think it's too much to > >ask of people, that they upgrade to the new and improved version from > >PHP version 3. > > Eh, sorry guys, my provider has two types of accounts: > - the low cost with php3, no mysql, low bandwidth, little disk space > - the high cost with php4, mysql high bandwidth, lots of disk space > > I can't afford the high cost account type so I stick with the low cost type. > Someone in this list suggested a while a go to persuade my provider to get > php4, but the only answer I got is: "No, I will not install php4, but you > can get the high cost account". > I guess a lot of people are in this situation. So therefor I would strongly > recommend not to dispose the php3 code. My feeling is that you're in a minority here - I think that most hosts have upgraded by now. It's a balance of where our priorities lie - continue with the old code, or work on the new. PHPWeather 2 is really quite a bit better than the 1.x branch. I'd like to develop it using the tools that are available. Especially, note that PHP3 has a big security hole, so your host has a choice of patch php3 or install 4, it's not that big a deal. They might not do it, but that's a different question... Max -- Never put the words "Diabolical Master Plan" on a CV |
|
From: Martin G. <gim...@gi...> - 2002-03-15 15:52:06
|
"Ray van Beek" <r_v...@ho...> writes: >> > What's important is that the way I'm writing stuff at the moment >> > relys on people having PHP4 - for example I used foreach(). I think >> > it's reasonable now to expect people to have php4. Any comments? >> >>It would surely make things a lot easier if we require PHP4. And now >>that PHP4 has been out for over 2 years I don't think it's too much to >>ask of people, that they upgrade to the new and improved version from >>PHP version 3. >=20 > Eh, sorry guys, my provider has two types of accounts: > - the low cost with php3, no mysql, low bandwidth, little disk space > - the high cost with php4, mysql high bandwidth, lots of disk space >=20 > I can't afford the high cost account type so I stick with the low > cost type. Someone in this list suggested a while a go to persuade > my provider to get php4, but the only answer I got is: "No, I will > not install php4, but you can get the high cost account". I really hope that cases like this are the minority - your provider doesn't seams to provide much service to it's customers. Since you're paying for this "service" I would either demand a current version of PHP or find another provider. > I guess a lot of people are in this situation. So therefor I would > strongly recommend not to dispose the php3 code. I would also like to support PHP3, but I think it would take a lot of effort to do so. And we would limit ourselves to work-arounds which would be slower and more difficult to get right. Could we have a quick vote on the list? There's 36 people on the list, so it wouldn't have any statistical significance, but it would give an indication of the number of people who still runs PHP3. =2D-=20 Martin Geisler My GnuPG Key: 0xF7F6B57B See my homepage at http://www.gimpster.com/ for: PHP Weather =3D> Shows the current weather on your webpage. PHP Shell =3D> A telnet-connection (almost :-) in a PHP page. |
|
From: <php...@de...> - 2002-03-15 16:34:15
|
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 16:51:58 +0100, "Martin Geisler" wrote: => Could we have a quick vote on the list? There's 36 people on the list, => so it wouldn't have any statistical significance, but it would give an => indication of the number of people who still runs PHP3. As one of the 36 on the list, I agree: leave this current level as a legacy [non-supported] level for PHP-3 "must-haves" but go with PHP4 (or 4.1) for all new development and release from here forward. IMO, you could have done this last year. Cheers, - Don |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X