Hi Everyone, I'm writing in connection with a question coming up lately during the "resource to opaque object migration" project ( https://github.com/php/php-tasks/issues/6) which we have been working on for quite a long while.
During the review of my PR migrating the resource returned by proc_open() to an object (https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/12098), it quickly became evident that there was no consensus about the new class name, since the originally proposed "Process" name has a non-negligible BC break likelihood. That's why we should find the best class name in accordance with Nikita's namespace naming convention RFC ( https://wiki.php.net/rfc/namespaces_in_bundled_extensions). Even though my PR currently implements "Standard\Process", this name is not a good candidate according to the policy: Because these extensions combine a lot of unrelated or only tangentially > related functionality, symbols should not be namespaced under the Core, > Standard or Spl namespaces. Instead, these extensions should be considered > as a collection of different components, and should be namespaced according > to these. Does anyone have a good suggestion? Thanks, Máté
