On 16.03.2010, at 19:23, Hannes Magnusson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 16:58, Derick Rethans <der...@derickrethans.nl> wrote: >> Before we add features, they need to be discussed whether we want to >> have them. > > Does that mean you want to take up a > - strict RFC-and-after-3months-discussion-before-commit policy > (i.e. killing the scratching-an-itch spirit of PHP) > - "I'm going to commit this patch tomorrow" mail to internals@ > (i.e. killing "I need this functionality, maybe others do to" spirit of PHP)
Its all a question about the scope of the change obviously. There is some tipping point where it makes sense for an RFC. Remember an RFC not only serves decision making, but also provides some level of documentation (on which the final documentation can be build) for past generations (this is why I for example wrote the ifsetor RFC after we decided that we cannot currently implement it). So like Stas said .. common sense still rules. > I would much rather have a development branch which ""everything > goes"" (like it used to) and then make it up to the release manager to > merge the features he wants in "his branch" (DVCS style) I dont think we ever had an "everything goes" HEAD .. lets say in the past we had a small very active core dev team with really short turn around times for decisions because everybody was answering on IRC or mailinglists within minutes. As a result decisions (not always for the better) were made in a much shorter timeframe than the current availability of core developers affords us. >> - Ilia's scalar type hint patch. > > And which of Ilias patches are you referring to? The original one > (which is identical to the patch I sent in November 2006) or the > "fucking eyh, I need to please everyone so this can be in 5.3 - but > still got rejected" patch? I think he clearly pointed to the wiki page which lists 3 proposals. He is just suggesting we should finalize which one we want and get it in. > You didn't even list the mbstring patch.. that was discussed and as > far as I remember everyone thought it was great idea, just not in a > stable branch. Is this tone really necessary? One you are argueing for more flexibility and then you are shooting the messenger because in a long list he forgot one thing (there are probably a few others .. we might want to go through the todo wiki pages for more)? regards, Lukas Kahwe Smith m...@pooteeweet.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
