Hi Zeev, >I have no problem with changing this >habit, but I do have an issue with changing it retroactively for a >particular vote.
Agreed, changing rules retroactively is bad. Considering improving practices for the future is good. >To your specific feedback, there's a migration document to extensions linked >from the RFC, and shared here on internals about 10 days ago: Thanks for that document. It would also be really useful if you could add a link to two commits of a non-trivial extension that has been migrated, with one commit before, and one commit after the migration. That would allow people like myself who only rarely dip into PHP internals to see the differences actually applied to code. cheers Dan On 6 August 2014 14:11, Zeev Suraski <z...@zend.com> wrote: > Dan, > > Votes area almost never pre-announced. I have no problem with changing this > habit, but I do have an issue with changing it retroactively for a > particular vote. > > Regarding your points, there's a mandatory discussion period during which > you should have brought these comments, instead of now. As a matter of > fact, discussion about PHPNG died out more than a week ago, to the level > that Dmitry even suggested we avoid wasting time and vote sooner (but that > goes against the rules so we didn't do that). > > If you think the RFC is incomplete in its details and that you can't vote > over it then you can of course withhold your vote or vote no. > > To your specific feedback, there's a migration document to extensions linked > from the RFC, and shared here on internals about 10 days ago: > https://wiki.php.net/phpng-upgrading > I added another link to it from the 'RFC impact' section, as perhaps that's > what prevented you from seeing it. > > I believe it's impractical to keep shared codebases for extensions between > PHP 5.x and PHPNG. Dmitry - please correct me if I'm wrong... > > Zeev > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Dan Ackroyd [mailto:dan...@basereality.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 4:01 PM >> To: Zeev Suraski >> Cc: PHP internals >> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Move the phpng branch to master >> >> Hi, >> >> It would be good if people announced that they were going to open things >> to >> vote with a warning, rather than just throwing the voting open. >> >> The RFC is nowhere complete in it's details for people to make rational >> decisions. e.g. the section on 'RFC impact' has this for the impact on >> extensions. >> >> "Existing extensions will have to be updated to reflect the new data >> structures >> and updated APIs. Much of this work is already done for most of the >> extensions bundled with PHP, but there are still extensions that need to >> be >> ported, and most of the extensions in PECL will have to be ported." >> >> That doesn't provide anything close to actual information about what needs >> to >> be done to port the extensions. There is no information about how >> extensions >> can support current PHP and PHPNG at the same time....which they will need >> to do for the next couple of years at least. >> >> >> cheers >> Dan >> >> >> On 6 August 2014 13:36, Zeev Suraski <z...@zend.com> wrote: >> > I opened the voting on the phpng RFC: >> > >> > >> > >> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/phpng#vote >> > >> > >> > >> > Voting ends on Thursday, August 14th. >> > >> > >> > >> > Please vote! >> > >> > >> > >> > Zeev -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
