[imp] Base64-only message not quoted in reply

[Robin Bankhead]

Quoting Michael M Slusarz <slusarz at horde.org>:

> Quoting Robin Bankhead <horde at headbank.co.uk>:
>
>> Quoting Michael J Rubinsky <mrubinsk at horde.org>:
>>
>>> Quoting Robin Bankhead <horde at headbank.co.uk>:
>>>
>>>> Quoting Michael M Slusarz <slusarz at horde.org>:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>> I *really* think this is probably the issue though.  My memory  
>>>>> is that there were bugs in the past relating to PHP variable  
>>>>> references that may cause this kind of behavior.  And I would  
>>>>> also classify PHP 5.3.1 as ancient ... it's over 5 years old.  I  
>>>>> personally would not want to be running 5 year old code that is  
>>>>> potentially publicly accessible to the Internet, if just for  
>>>>> security reasons.
>>>>>
>>>>> michael
>>>>>
>>>> Personally I wouldn't either, but it's not, so I have the luxury  
>>>> of prioritising the stability of my codebase.  Even so, I bet  
>>>> you'd find plenty of web hosts where 5.3 is still deployed - the  
>>>> need to guarantee *functional* continuity/stability is pretty big  
>>>> in that context too. I rather imagined that was why horde's  
>>>> INSTALL file specifies the requirement as 5.3.0 and up.
>>>
>>> Actually, 5.3.0 refers to the PHP *API*, not to anything specific  
>>> to the PHP internals such as bug fixes. It only means that our  
>>> code utilizes functionality that may not be available until 5.3.0  
>>> and does not rely on anything that isn't documented as being  
>>> available in the 5.3.0 API.
>>> -- 
>>> mike
>>>
>> I see.  In that case I'll upgrade to the latest stable php-5.3.*,  
>> will that be satisfactory?
>
> That's the best move.
>
> As those that frequent the list know, I am not a big fan of the way  
> certain linux distributions handle packages.  Using PHP as an  
> example: you are essentially trading the PHP developers  
> opinion/expertise on bugfixes (within a specific 5.x release) for a  
> package maintainers opinion ... with the caveat that not only is the  
> package maintainer possibly cherrypicking the patches, but the  
> package maintainer also is responsible for resolving the inevitable  
> conflict issues that are going to occur when the full subset of  
> changes is not made.
>
> PHP can be pretty bad API wise moving between point releases (i.e.  
> 5.3 -> 5.4).  But there are few/any problems we have experienced  
> when moving within a point release (i.e. 5.3.10 -> 5.3.11).
>
> michael
>
In this instance, the install is on Windows, so the PHP distro is 100%  
as nature intended ;)

Anecdotally, I've run Horde H3 through H5 on up-to-date 5.3.x on  
Gentoo at home, and not had any minor-version upgrade hiccups, and  
from what I can see they *do* patch the source quite extensively. It  
took them almost a year to release 5.3.0, but this is I guess the  
reality of making a codebase like PHP work across so many arches and  
as part of a much larger software stack, to say nothing of Gentoo's  
particular case of umpteen possible build configurations.  I won't ask  
whether it's one of the distros you had in mind ;)

Anyway when I get the 5.3.* update completed I'll see whether we're  
still having problems.

Thanks,
Robin Bankhead