Hey Andi,

> I agreed to make life easier on Derick who didn't want to maintain the
> patch outside of CVS, mainly because there were some bug fixes mixed in
> with it. I didn't realize this would cause havoc.

It hasn't created havoc.  My concern is that it precluded discussion.

> Derick did bring the API to this list and besides the OO recommendation I
> didn't see much pushback.

True.  There are other issues though - like, it was written very quickly, by
a single developer, very late in a release cycle, represents fairly major
functionality and may or may not be the best-considered implementation.

I suggest that if people have issues with the
> API, then it's a good time to bring them up and discuss them.

I don't believe this is the right time to do this - you said 'after 5.1.0',
and most (all?) of the dev team want to see 5.1.0 stable and 'out there'
before opening this can of worms.

> We can
> refrain from uncommenting that code until we reach an agreement.

It shouldn't even be there until there is agreement...

- Steph

>
> Andi
>
>
> At 03:09 PM 7/21/2005 +0100, Steph wrote:
> >All,
> >
> >I know I haven't much sway here, but...
> >
> >No disrespect to either Andi or Derick, I just want to register publicly
my
> >opinion that putting contentious code into CVS HEAD, even out-commented,
> >sets a worrying precedent.  There may well still be 'room for change and
> >discussion', but once it's in CVS it is fairly obvious that this solution
is
> >going to be more favoured than any other potential approach.  It says the
> >discussion is over.
> >
> >If this is isolated code, surely it shouldn't be too difficult to
maintain
> >it elsewhere?
> >
> >I can't see this commit as anything other than a political decision, and
it
> >makes me very uneasy.
> >
> >Please - any dev - feel free to explain how I'm seeing it all wrong,
> >preferably in words of one syllable.  (Derick: polite ones? ;)
> >
> >- Steph
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Andi Gutmans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "Pierre-Alain Joye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <internals@lists.php.net>
> >Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 4:31 PM
> >Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-CVS] cvs: php-src /ext/date...
> >
> >
> > > Guys,
> > >
> > > Regarding Derick's commit, it's a very technical matter. It's
commented
> >and
> > > not enabled. Now new features crept in and after reviewing the patch,
I
> > > felt that it's not dangerous nor complicated to let it sit in CVS
> > > commented. As you can see it's very isolated code so there's still
room
> >for
> > > change & discussion. Now to a more important issue than technicality
of
> > > where code sits:
> > >
> > > I'll say it again. You should really work as a team and come with the
best
> > > solution that will benefit the PHP community! Development is typically
a
> > > 1+1=3 equation. The end result of a small team is better than that of
an
> > > individual.
> > >
> > > Guys, work [EMAIL PROTECTED] You'll get the best results and ultimately 
> > > our
> >goal
> > > is to provide the best solutions to PHP users, not spend time in
politics
> > > and on ego trips.
> > >
> > > I'm not going to play policeman (and I shouldn't). You guys really
have to
> > > work it out together...
> > >
> > > Andi
> > >
> > > At 11:13 AM 7/20/2005 +0200, Pierre-Alain Joye wrote:
> > > >On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 10:40:20 +0200
> > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Edin Kadribasic) wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Derick,
> > > > >
> > > > > Didn't we agree not to do this until 5.1 was released? Please
> > > > > revert the object support.
> > > >
> > > >Derick told me on IRC that he agreed on that with Andi.
> > > >
> > > >I still think that we should not expose the new lib now. It is far
> > > >too early.
> > > >
> > > >I said that I will post the specs 10 days ago, sorry about that,
> > > >got other problems to solve (various php4.4 problems like
> > > >segfaults and some more urgent sec fixes in various packages...).
> > > >
> > > >But the fact that we agreed to do not expose it using new APIs
> > > >before 5.1 branched and back to real -dev is still valid.
> > > >
> > > >Again, please revert.
> > > >
> > > >--Pierre
> > > >
> > > >--
> > > >PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> > > >To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
> > >
> > > --
> > > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> > > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
> > >
>

-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to