On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Derick Rethans <der...@php.net> wrote: > On Mon, 21 Jul 2014, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > >> > I can only agree here. >> > >> > I'd like a clean API. We need to consider PHP-Next jump as an >> > opportunity to clean our API and finally have something >> > understandable for a newcomer, and documented. That's a move nobody >> > dared to take in the last decade, degrading more and more our >> > codebase in term of understandability and flexibility. This can't >> > last >> >> I'm more than agree about internal cleanup. phpng benchmark results >> proved that we take the right direction and now we implemented most >> the ideas we had. Note that we tried not to change PHP behaviour in >> any way. Now it's a good time to start the cleanup work. > > Actually, I think that should be done after merging / changing it to > master. Right now, the phpng vs master branch differences are ... rather > large. It'd be good to do additional cleanup in smaller chunks later on > as it makes it a lot easier to review those changes.
Review and changes in the feature(s) branch, then propose when ready. This is also why I asked to do so in the 1st days when phpng was proposed: Stop adding new changes, cleanup, stabilize, propose, continue the work. They refused it and now we should do it in the most ugly way? Merging into master or even worst replace master with something we have no idea about? Seriously? -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
