Hi Midori,
If an implementation is ready for beta 1, then it can be merged.
It may be a good idea to collaborate with Sara; I think Sara was
considering providing the implementation.
Cheers
Joe
On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 8:41 AM, Midori Kocak <mtko...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
>
> Remember the ??=. I had a faulty implementation and after that a serious
> surgery and I did not have the time to update my implementation. I am OK
> now but what should I do with my RFC? Can somebody implement it or should I
> move forward with the implementation. What do you guys say? What is your
> advice?
>
> Best wishes.
>
> Midori Kocak
> Computer Scientist & Engineer
> http://www.mynameismidori.com
>
> “*The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the
> source of all true art and science.*” Albert Einstein
>
> On 06 May 2016, at 09:25, Joe Watkins <pthre...@pthreads.org> wrote:
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Joe Watkins <pthre...@pthreads.org>
> Date: Fri, May 6, 2016 at 8:23 AM
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Looking (not very far) ahead to PHP 7.1
> To: Björn Larsson <bjorn.x.lars...@telia.com>
> Cc: Davey Shafik <da...@php.net>
>
>
> Morning,
>
> PHP 5 has been with us for a long time, towards the end of it's life, it
> didn't make much sense to have protracted pre-release periods.
>
> PHP 7 has been with us for no time at all, about 5 minutes; It still
> creates a fair amount of core (/Zend) bugs, and there are only a few people
> who are able, or who bother, to search for and or resolve such bugs.
>
> An RFC does not *need* to be accompanied by an implementation (for some
> reason), so we can't very well say "no more RFC after X". All we are
> concerned about is the implementation that accompanies the RFC.
>
> Everyone should move forward with their RFC, and voting, in the
> knowledge that if the implementation is not ready for Beta 1, it's too
> late.
>
> Worth noting that we're only really talking about the feature kind of
> RFC: If some internal problem is found that requires an RFC discussion to
> resolve and choose a solution for, no problem - that's what we should be
> doing at this point.
>
> We don't really need to be any more restrictive than that.
>
> I quite often supply patches for RFC discussions, I get that it's
> annoying for someone to say "staph". I get that 7 is shiny, it's easy to
> implement complex features, I get that we all waited a long time for such a
> platform.
>
> I also get that 7.2 is going to be a thing :)
>
> Cheers
> Joe
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 9:58 PM, Björn Larsson <bjorn.x.lars...@telia.com>
> wrote:
>
> Ok, well I guess there is always room to change at alpha1 when
> all RFC's should be on the table. Agree that 7.1 looks like a busy
> release :-)
>
> I mean, earlier (5.6 & maybe also 7.0) no new RFC's introduced
> after alpha1 and voting closed by first beta. Same strategy in 7.1?
> Cheers //Björn
>
>
> Den 2016-05-05 kl. 22:53, skrev Davey Shafik:
>
> Bjorn,
>
> I had the same suggestion, but Joe has convinced me that due to the amount
> and extent of changes we'd rather have more than we need, than too few!
>
> - Davey
>
> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Björn Larsson <bjorn.x.lars...@telia.com>
> wrote:
>
> Aha, I see & tnx. It's not on the front-page so I missed it.
>
> One reflection is that you have similar amount of
> alpha / beta / RC steps like for 7.0 that was a major
> release. Looking at todo lists on 5.x. the numbers of
> steps are smaller. On the other hand 7.1 seems like
> a busy release with typed properties etc
>
> Just my 5c...
>
> Cheers //Björn
> Den 2016-05-05 kl. 22:36, skrev Davey Shafik:
>
> The same one used for the vote is where we are currently working. Nothing
> is set in stone yet!
>
> https://wiki.php.net/todo/php71
>
> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:35 PM, Björn Larsson <
> <bjorn.x.lars...@telia.com>bjorn.x.lars...@telia.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Short question, will you make a todolist like for 7.0 on:
> - https://wiki.php.net/todo
>
> And good luck with the work as RMs! Already looking
> forward to 7.1 with some exciting content.
>
> Regards //Björn Larsson
>
>
> Den 2016-05-05 kl. 18:26, skrev Joe Watkins:
>
> Afternoon internals,
>
> We are hoping for alpha 1 to be available on June 9th, this is a
> little
> over 5 weeks away.
>
> Beta 1 (~1 month after alpha 1) on July 7th will be our feature
> freeze
> date - no new RFC's can target 7.1 after this date.
>
> PHP 7.1 has many things targeting it at the moment, some
> overlapping,
> all of them in various states.
>
> So that the dust is allowed to settle during beta phase, we need to
> insist that anything that does not have an implementation by the time
> beta
> 1 comes be pushed back to 7.2.
>
> If you are working on a core (/Zend) feature right now, especially
> draft (unannounced) features, and are targeting 7.1, as a matter of
> courtesy (not requirement), I'd like to ask you to move forward,
> post-haste. It would be good (although not required) if we could get
> /Zend
> stuff merged before alpha 1 ... I realize this may be a pipe dream. I'm
> new
> at this, and still have dreams ...
>
> TL:DR, dates for diary:
>
> Alpha 1 June 9th
> Beta 1 (freeze) July 7th
>
> Cheers
> Joe
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
