Hi all,
I'm still not convinced everyone on this thread is actually talking
about the same idea.
For instance, on whether an experimental feature would require the same
consensus as a non-experimental one:
On 11/10/2022 00:06, Mike Schinkel wrote:
If there were an RFC for Experimental Use then the people on the fence could choose to
allow it to see how it plays out in real-world userland cases, and a few people against
it might be convinced to allow people to evaluate it, and then later make a decision on a
"Forever RFC."
On 11/10/2022 05:38, Jordan LeDoux wrote:
I don't really see what the confusion is about. It's for features that we
have all agreed to include, but that the public API or behavior might
change in minor versions while usage information, feedback, and so-on
happens.
Similarly, some are talking about getting features to users sooner, but
others about leaving it experimental for as long as it takes, which
means it gets to production *later* than if it was tested in the
existing alpha/beta cycle.
I think it would be really helpful to have some concrete examples,
either from other languages, or of a hypothetical feature that you think
would be a good use case clarifying:
* How it would be accepted as experimental - would it require the same
voting threshold etc as a "stable" feature?
* When would it be released - in PHP terms, if it was voted on in April
this year, would it have gone into 8.1.5 or waited until 8.2.0?
* What is the process for changes? Would they require votes? Would they
go into point releases like 8.1.9 or 8.2.5, or wait until 8.3.0?
* What is the process for marking stable? Would it require another vote?
What version would *that* go into?
I'm not saying we have to have final answers to these questions, but it
would be helpful to understand people's gut feeling on them, to get a
better idea of what people are imagining.
Regards,
--
Rowan Tommins
[IMSoP]
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
