Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > And yes, I am aware that a large part of the concern is the definition > of "malicious jackass who hurts people" and "hostile, insulting storm". Not only that. But that even if we have the definition, nobody walks around with a convenient label of "malicious jackass who hurts people" on th

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > A code of conduct without an enforcement mechanism is useless. It's very > nice to be able to say that we don't condone harassment or abuse, or > that personal attacks or publishing personal information are not > acceptable, but if we can't enforce it, then it falls down the moment But we c

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 01/07/2016 10:08 PM, Brian Moon wrote: Why not? The harassment has been nullified. I agree with your position on most of this, Paul. However, free email, and thus, Twitter and other social media accounts are nearly unlimited. It becomes an arms race to try and block someone. Brian. Simpl

Re: [PHP-DEV] Implementing Generics, and none scalar default properties.

Hi Ben and Rasmus, On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 6:24 PM, Ben Scholzen 'DASPRiD' wrote: > By the way, Rasmus updated the RFC quite a bit, you guys may want to take > a look at it again. > > I just have a couple questions about the rfc, but overall I think its great and I really hope it makes it into PH

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Jan 8, 2016 5:51 AM, "Zeev Suraski" wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Anthony Ferrara > wrote: > > > Zeev, > > > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > >> -Original Message- > > >> From: Anthony Ferrara [mailto:ircmax...@gmail.com] > > >> Sent: Thursday, J

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> Why not? The harassment has been nullified. I agree with your position on most of this, Paul. However, free email, and thus, Twitter and other social media accounts are nearly unlimited. It becomes an arms race to try and block someone. Brian. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailin

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Class Friendship

Dan, On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 10:21 PM, Dan Ackroyd wrote: > > FYI The voting RFC is reasonably clear on new syntax and the passing > level: https://wiki.php.net/RFC/voting#voting > > "For these reasons, a feature affecting the language itself (new > syntax for example) will be considered as 'accep

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Class Friendship

Hi François, On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 8:33 PM, François Laupretre wrote: > > * There is another inheritance property I didn't include in my initial > article, and I think that should be described : > > class Base { > friend BaseFriend; > protected $base_prop; > static protec

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Class Friendship

On 8 January 2016 at 01:33, François Laupretre wrote: > Hi Dustin, > * About the voter's majority, I see that as a pure addition and there's no > BC break. So, I would say that a 50%+1 majority should be enough. To be > confirmed. > FYI The voting RFC is reasonably clear on new syntax and the pa

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Warn about invalid strings in arithmetic

Hi Andrea, Le 08/01/2016 01:03, Andrea Faulds a écrit : Hi everyone, I'm proposing a new RFC to make it easier to spot errors when using PHP's arithmetic operators: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/invalid_strings_in_arithmetic Please read it and tell me your thoughts. Thanks! I would suggest we s

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Class Friendship

Hi Dustin, thanks for this nice work ! Here are some comments and thoughts : * There is another inheritance property I didn't include in my initial article, and I think that should be described : class Base { friend BaseFriend; protected $base_prop; static protected $

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC Discussion] Precise Session Management

Hi Dan, On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 12:54 AM, Dan Ackroyd wrote: > > I find it hard to give feedback on this RFC as I cannot understand > what it is saying. > > In an RFC, defining behaviour just through example like this: > >> Obsolete session data has NEW_SID and TTL upto session.ttl_destroy. >> >>

Re: [PHP-DEV] Implementing Generics, and none scalar default properties.

By the way, Rasmus updated the RFC quite a bit, you guys may want to take a look at it again. On 26.09.2015 12:23, Dominic Grostate wrote: An alternative that rfc might be to add a modifier to ctor, something like. required public function __construct(); A required function cannot be final, b

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote: > Having a CoC which is wider in scope and ratified by a voted RFC rather > than an email on some mailing list sends a strong message. Having it in > our contributor guidelines would also go a long way. > > I guess here we fundamentally disagree

[PHP-DEV] [RFC] Warn about invalid strings in arithmetic

Hi everyone, I'm proposing a new RFC to make it easier to spot errors when using PHP's arithmetic operators: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/invalid_strings_in_arithmetic Please read it and tell me your thoughts. Thanks! -- Andrea Faulds https://ajf.me/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development M

[PHP-DEV] PHP 5.6.17 is available

Hello! The PHP development team announces the immediate availability of PHP 5.6.17 . 5 security related issues were fixed in this release. All PHP 5.6 users are encouraged to upgrade to this version. For source downloads of PHP 5.6.17 please visit our downloads page: http://www.php.net/downloads.

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > It is not what I am referring to but harassment, insults, attacks or > similar events. I do not think we need to discuss endlessly that we Proposed CoC says "insulting/derogatory comments" and "[o]ther unethical or unprofessional conduct". And that can be (and in some cases has been) treate

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > Zeev, > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote: > >> -Original Message- > >> From: Anthony Ferrara [mailto:ircmax...@gmail.com] > >> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 8:15 PM > >> To: internals@lists.php.net > >> Subj

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 1/7/16 4:48 PM, Bishop Bettini wrote: Hi Andrea, On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 2:44 PM, Andrea Faulds wrote: I do wonder if we're really going anywhere here. I don't think we are. We're arguing protocol, process, and punishment before agreeing on rights and responsibilities. Design before r

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Le 07/01/2016 21:50, Zeev Suraski a écrit : -Original Message- From: Anthony Ferrara [mailto:ircmax...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 8:15 PM To: internals@lists.php.net Subject: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct All, On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Anthony

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Zeev, On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: Anthony Ferrara [mailto:ircmax...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 8:15 PM >> To: internals@lists.php.net >> Subject: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct >> >> All, >> >> O

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi Andrea, On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 2:44 PM, Andrea Faulds wrote: > > I do wonder if we're really going anywhere here. I don't think we are. We're arguing protocol, process, and punishment before agreeing on rights and responsibilities. I suggest we agree on first principles. Submitted for consi

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Differentiate op from assign-op in operator overloading

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 8:18 PM, Sara Golemon wrote: > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 5:16 AM, Nikita Popov wrote: > > GMP objects are, with the exceptions of gmp_setbit and gmp_clrbit, > immutable > > value objects. And yes, that's exactly what I would expect any object > > representing a number to be.

RE: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> -Original Message- > From: Anthony Ferrara [mailto:ircmax...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 8:15 PM > To: internals@lists.php.net > Subject: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct > > All, > > On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Anthony Ferrara > wrote: > > There ha

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Jan 8, 2016 3:14 AM, "Chase Peeler" wrote: > > And none of those caveats exist in the definition you provided. Hmmm. Which one did you read? "the act of systematic and/or continued unwanted and annoying actions of one party or a group, including threats and demands. The purposes may vary, in

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Jan 8, 2016 3:39 AM, "Chase Peeler" wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: >> >> >> On Jan 8, 2016 3:34 AM, "Chase Peeler" wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On Jan 8, 2016 3:14 AM, "Chase Peeler" wrote:

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 7, 2016, at 14:17, Pierre Joye wrote: > > As I said, if someone is clearly behaving with harassment, insult, etc to > fulfil his goal (f.e. to kick someone out, or stop/force someone to do > something ), then he has no place here. No matter where the acts happen. > > I am slowly givi

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > You're missing the basic point. If someone makes a complaint with a > complaints process that handles everything in the open, i.e. with your > suggestion of the standard RFC process: What you say is true. However, as I previously said, the alternative is taking action on behalf of the commu

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Jan 8, 2016 3:12 AM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote: > > > > On Jan 7, 2016, at 13:51, Pierre Joye wrote: > > > > It is not. To me to distinguish harassment vs hot discussions (public or private) is part of common sense and I trust us to have this common sense when this group will be created. > > I opi

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > This was tried once [1] and there was an immediate knee-jerk reaction [1] > which resulted in quickly removing the feature. Maybe the winds have > changed between then and now? That was for technical RFCs, for which I still thing it is wrong. But, for conflict resolution, it may be differe

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: > > On Jan 8, 2016 2:58 AM, "Chase Peeler" wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Pierre Joye > wrote: > >> > >> On Jan 8, 2016 2:44 AM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Jan 7, 2016, at 13:39, Pierre Joye wrote

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: > > On Jan 8, 2016 3:34 AM, "Chase Peeler" wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Pierre Joye > wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Jan 8, 2016 3:14 AM, "Chase Peeler" wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > And none of those caveats exist in the defin

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Jan 8, 2016 3:34 AM, "Chase Peeler" wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: >> >> >> On Jan 8, 2016 3:14 AM, "Chase Peeler" wrote: >> >> > >> > And none of those caveats exist in the definition you provided. >> >> Hmmm. Which one did you read? >> >> "the act of syste

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: > > On Jan 8, 2016 3:14 AM, "Chase Peeler" wrote: > > > > > And none of those caveats exist in the definition you provided. > > Hmmm. Which one did you read? > > "the act of systematic and/or continued unwanted and annoying actions of > one part

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 7, 2016, at 14:31, Dan Ackroyd wrote: > > On 7 January 2016 at 20:12, Paul M. Jones wrote: >> >> If the activity in question rises to the level of filing a petition for *and >> being granted* a restraining order, *then and only then* might the project >> have some responsibility to

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Differentiate op from assign-op in operator overloading

> Am 07.01.2016 um 20:29 schrieb Sara Golemon : > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 6:04 AM, Bob Weinand wrote: >> I think this RFC is attempting to solve the wrong problem... Let me explain >> why: >> >> a) What do you do in cases like: >> $a = gmp_init(125); >> $b = $a; >> $b += 10; >> >> $a and $b hold

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 7 January 2016 at 20:12, Paul M. Jones wrote: > > If the activity in question rises to the level of filing a petition for *and > being granted* a restraining order, *then and only then* might the project > have some responsibility to help enforce that order, since the project itself > may b

[PHP-DEV] [RFC] Class Friendship

Hello everyone, Before Winter holiday, I began a discussion on the mailing list regarding the topic of class friendship in order to gauge interest towards authoring and implementing an RFC for the feature. This discussion happened at: https://marc.info/?l=php-internals&m=144954699701305&w=2 I ha

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 7, 2016, at 13:51, Pierre Joye wrote: > > It is not. To me to distinguish harassment vs hot discussions (public or > private) is part of common sense and I trust us to have this common sense > when this group will be created. I opine that if "common sense" were enough, then no COC wo

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Jan 8, 2016 2:58 AM, "Chase Peeler" wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: >> >> On Jan 8, 2016 2:44 AM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote: >> > >> > >> > > On Jan 7, 2016, at 13:39, Pierre Joye wrote: >> > > >> > > >> > > On Jan 8, 2016 2:27 AM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote: >> > >

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 7 Jan 2016 20:59, "Chase Peeler" wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: > > > On Jan 8, 2016 2:44 AM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 7, 2016, at 13:39, Pierre Joye wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 8, 2016 2:27 AM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote: > > > >

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Jan 8, 2016 2:27 AM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote: > > > > On Jan 7, 2016, at 13:25, Pierre Joye wrote: > > > > > > On Jan 8, 2016 2:21 AM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 7, 2016, at 13:15, Pierre Joye wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Jan 8, 2016 1:58 AM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Jan 8, 2016 2:21 AM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote: > > > > On Jan 7, 2016, at 13:15, Pierre Joye wrote: > > > > > >> On Jan 8, 2016 1:58 AM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote: > >> > >> I notice you did not answer my question. I'll ask again: when you say "proven guilty" what exactly do you mean? > > > > I see

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Jan 8, 2016 1:58 AM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote: > > > > On Jan 7, 2016, at 12:14, Pierre Joye wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 11:52 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote: > >> > >>> On Jan 7, 2016, at 10:47, Pierre Joye wrote: > >>> > >>> Are you saying that a person has his place in php.net after being

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 7, 2016, at 12:14, Pierre Joye wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 11:52 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote: >> >>> On Jan 7, 2016, at 10:47, Pierre Joye wrote: >>> >>> Are you saying that a person has his place in php.net after being proven >>> gulty of harassment or other similar events? >>

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi Stas. Stanislav Malyshev wrote: If someone starts to put bad pressure on another person (harassment, insults, personal attacks, etc) trying to make this person either abandon an idea, RFC or even to force this person to leave the project, the attacker will most likely use non php.net's channe

Re: [PHP-DEV] mcrypt extermination plan

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Lior Kaplan wrote: > On Jan 7, 2016 6:59 PM, "Remi Collet" wrote: >> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Le 07/01/2016 17:54, Scott Arciszewski a écrit : >> > All, >> > >> > I propose the following timeline to give ext/mcrypt the viking >> > f

Re: [PHP-DEV] mcrypt extermination plan

On Jan 7, 2016 6:59 PM, "Remi Collet" wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Le 07/01/2016 17:54, Scott Arciszewski a écrit : > > All, > > > > I propose the following timeline to give ext/mcrypt the viking > > funeral it deserves: > > > > PHP 7.1 - all mcrypt functions rais

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 11:52 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote: > >> On Jan 7, 2016, at 10:47, Pierre Joye wrote: >> >> Are you saying that a person has his place in php.net after being proven >> gulty of harassment or other similar events? > > When you say "proven guilty" what exactly do you mean? > > Me

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > What it means is the other person can open their PHP-DEV email folder > and know that there's not going to be any subtle crap from the person > that is harassing waiting for them when they want to contribute to > PHP. I though we were discussing applying CoC *outside* php lists. PHP-DEV ema

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

The way I see this, and I believe others do as well based on the previous recommendation to split this into two RFCs, is there are two goals: 1.) Making it clear that the community welcomes all individuals 2.) A means for handling conflict resolution. To me, #1 doesn't really fall into a "Code of

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 7, 2016, at 11:25, Dan Ackroyd wrote: > > What it means is the other person can open their PHP-DEV email folder > and know that there's not going to be any subtle crap from the person > that is harassing waiting for them when they want to contribute to > PHP. Once they have blocked/mut

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 7 January 2016 at 17:14, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > > If somebody harasses the other person on Twitter, how exactly banning > this person from internals list is going to make that stop? It doesn't. What it means is the other person can open their PHP-DEV email folder and know that there's no

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 7 January 2016 at 16:50, Kevin Smith wrote: > > Would an RFC to ban that person from official channels not suffice here? > You're missing the basic point. If someone makes a complaint with a complaints process that handles everything in the open, i.e. with your suggestion of the standard RFC p

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Libsodium

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 11:58 AM, Jan Ehrhardt wrote: > Anthony Ferrara in php.internals (Thu, 7 Jan 2016 11:30:14 -0500): >>I agree with you in principle, but in this particular case I think >>that there's enough justification considering how measurably bad >>mcrypt is, and how little some people

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Libsodium

Anthony Ferrara in php.internals (Thu, 7 Jan 2016 11:30:14 -0500): >I agree with you in principle, but in this particular case I think >that there's enough justification considering how measurably bad >mcrypt is, and how little some people trust openssl. OTH, OpenSSL has made progress and the qual

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 7, 2016, at 10:37, Pierre Joye wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 11:28 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote: >> >>> On Jan 7, 2016, at 10:17, Pierre Joye wrote: >>> >>> If someone starts to put bad pressure on another person (harassment, >>> insults, personal attacks, etc) trying to make this pe

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 11:28 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote: > >> On Jan 7, 2016, at 10:17, Pierre Joye wrote: >> >> If someone starts to put bad pressure on another person (harassment, >> insults, personal attacks, etc) trying to make this person either >> abandon an idea, RFC or even to force this per

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 7, 2016, at 10:08 AM, Paul M. Jones wrote: > > Hi all, > > As I have stated previously, I find the Contributor Covenant text > objectionable, in that it couples person, project, and politics, so that the > person becomes answerable to the project for their politics. > > If there sim

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Libsodium

Pierre, >> Even if we axe mcrypt and in with a net-gain of 0 extensions, you'd >> see it as a risk? > > Except that we already refused to kill mcrypt, and it is not like I > did not try to convince us to kill it. We decided not to kill it for 7.0. That doesn't mean it got a permanent buy... >>

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 7, 2016, at 10:17, Pierre Joye wrote: > > If someone starts to put bad pressure on another person (harassment, > insults, personal attacks, etc) trying to make this person either > abandon an idea, RFC or even to force this person to leave the > project, the attacker will most likely us

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> Saying that we "do not care" because it does not happen inside php.net > > would be very hypocrite and makes the CoC totally useless. Recognizing that it is irresponsible (and indeed impossible) for an official PHP body to try to control behavior that takes place outside the

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Libsodium

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 11:11 PM, Scott Arciszewski wrote: > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 10:51 AM, Pierre Joye wrote: >> HI Scott, >> >> On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 8:26 PM, Scott Arciszewski >> wrote: >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> I've updated the RFC to make libsodium a core PHP extension in 7.1, to >>> incl

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Libsodium

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 10:51 AM, Pierre Joye wrote: > HI Scott, > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 8:26 PM, Scott Arciszewski wrote: >> Hi everyone, >> >> I've updated the RFC to make libsodium a core PHP extension in 7.1, to >> include references to the online documentation. >> >> https://wiki.php.net/r

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Libsodium

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Scott Arciszewski wrote: > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Rouven Weßling > wrote: >> Hi Scott, >> >> questions inline. >> >>> On 07 Jan 2016, at 14:26, Scott Arciszewski wrote: >>> >>> I've updated the RFC to make libsodium a core PHP extension in 7.1, to >>>

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Libsodium

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Rouven Weßling wrote: > Hi Scott, > > questions inline. > >> On 07 Jan 2016, at 14:26, Scott Arciszewski wrote: >> >> I've updated the RFC to make libsodium a core PHP extension in 7.1, to >> include references to the online documentation. >> >> https://wiki.php.n

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC Discussion] Precise Session Management

Hi Yasuo, I find it hard to give feedback on this RFC as I cannot understand what it is saying. In an RFC, defining behaviour just through example like this: > Obsolete session data has NEW_SID and TTL upto session.ttl_destroy. > > $_SESSION['__PHP_SESSION__']['NEW_SID'] = ; > $_SESSION['__P

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Libsodium

Hi Scott, questions inline. > On 07 Jan 2016, at 14:26, Scott Arciszewski wrote: > > I've updated the RFC to make libsodium a core PHP extension in 7.1, to > include references to the online documentation. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/libsodium I know this is made difficult by the fact that t

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Libsodium

HI Scott, On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 8:26 PM, Scott Arciszewski wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I've updated the RFC to make libsodium a core PHP extension in 7.1, to > include references to the online documentation. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/libsodium > > All new functions and classes would exist in th

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Libsodium

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 10:20 AM, Bishop Bettini wrote: > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 8:26 AM, Scott Arciszewski > wrote: >> >> I've updated the RFC to make libsodium a core PHP extension in 7.1, to >> include references to the online documentation. >> >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/libsodium >> >> All ne

[PHP-DEV] [RFC] Libsodium

Hi everyone, I've updated the RFC to make libsodium a core PHP extension in 7.1, to include references to the online documentation. https://wiki.php.net/rfc/libsodium All new functions and classes would exist in the Sodium namespace. e.g. $ciphertext = \Sodium\crypto_box($message, $nonce, $

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Differentiate op from assign-op in operator overloading

On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 7:17 PM, Sara Golemon wrote: > On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 1:39 AM, Nikita Popov wrote: > > I'd like to provide some context as to why the current implementation > works > > as it does. > > > Thanks for the context, Niki. It makes sense that, with GMP as the > flagship target

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Le 07/01/2016 10:03, Peter Cowburn a écrit : Just replying on the anonymous RFC votes side-topic. That's another question. Ideally, votes should be anonymous, even on RFCs. Scalar type hints have proved that seeing other's vote may be a very bad thing. This was tried once [1] and there was

RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> -Original Message- > From: Anthony Ferrara [mailto:ircmax...@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2016 10:48 PM > To: François Laupretre > Cc: Ryan Pallas ; Paul M. Jones > ; Andrea Faulds ; > internals@lists.php.net > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct > > A