Morning Internals,
To start, I find it ironic that the people claiming that having everything
self host is better for accessibility when the exact day most of this
discussion occurred I'd wager 99% of the mailing list subscribers weren't
able to follow the discussion as there was an issue with PHP
On Sat, 2 Nov 2019, Nikita Popov wrote:
> In particular, I would like to start with the following fairly limited
> proposal:
>
> * RFCs may still be submitted directly against the wiki, using GitHub is
> optional. For small and straightforward proposals this might be easiest.
> * After an RFC p
> All are real problems, today. Spain's exams is the smallest one. Other cases
> affect many people already with Github (at large).
You misunderstood my comments.
I did not mean they were not real problems for the people who they affected by
those issues; they absolutely are. And I have empathy
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019, 10:00 AM Mike Schinkel wrote:
> .
>
> So given all those concerns are currently hypothetical
All are real problems, today. Spain's exams is the smallest one. Other
cases affect many people already with Github (at large).
best,
> https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/9kevn7/spain-and-github-are-blocking-an-app-that-helped-protesters-organize
> https://github.com/github/gov-takedowns/blob/master/Spain/2019/2019-10-26-GuardiaCivil.md
It would seem to me that if any country decided that downloading and working
with PHP were a
Den 2019-11-02 kl. 17:32, skrev Nikita Popov:
Hi internals,
Now that the union types RFC is drawing to a close, I think it's time to
discuss the question of RFCs in GitHub pull requests again. Overall I'm
fairly pleased with how this went and would like to adopt the process in
some form.
In par
Afternoon,
It should be clear that if we were in receipt of the kind of notice that
the Guardia sent to Github we would be extremely ill advised to ignore it,
regardless of the services we use, location of servers, or any other detail
you care to mention. The Guardia did not target Github because
Morning Pierre,
> Sorry, no time to dig in our list of current active contributors and
define the risks for each of them.
That's not what I asked for, I asked for a single concrete example where
this would have in fact been a problem.
I'm in Spain, and unaware of any access problems ...
Can you
sorry, bad roads and writing from my mobile. I am not driving but still ;-)
On Mon, Nov 4, 2019, 7:33 PM Pierre Joye wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 4, 2019, 7:25 PM Joe Watkins wrote:
>
>> Afternoon,
>>
>> It should be clear that if we were in receipt of the kind of notice that
>> the Guardia sent to
On Mon, Nov 4, 2019, 12:54 PM Joe Watkins wrote:
> Morning,
>
> I don't want to follow this tangent for too long on owning content.
>
> Pierre, can you point to any contribution that would have been blocked by
> our use of github ?
>
Sorry, no time to dig in our list of current active contribut
Morning,
I don't want to follow this tangent for too long on owning content.
Pierre, can you point to any contribution that would have been blocked by
our use of github ?
For all intents and purposes, the majority of new development does actually
happen on github. As a result of us being terribl
On Mon, Nov 4, 2019, 2:35 PM Joe Watkins wrote:
> Morning Pierre,
>
> > Sorry, no time to dig in our list of current active contributors and
> define the risks for each of them.
>
> That's not what I asked for, I asked for a single concrete example where
> this would have in fact been a problem.
On November 4, 2019 8:35:16 AM GMT+01:00, Joe Watkins wrote:
>I'm in Spain, and unaware of any access problems ...
In Spain there recently was a court case against an app used to organize
protests for an independence of Catalonia. In consequence Github was required
to block access from Spain
On Mon, Nov 4, 2019, 7:25 PM Joe Watkins wrote:
> Afternoon,
>
> It should be clear that if we were in receipt of the kind of notice that
> the Guardia sent to Github we would be extremely ill advised to ignore it,
> regardless of the services we use, location of servers, or any other detail
> yo
Le samedi 2 novembre 2019, 19:40:56 CET Joe Watkins a écrit :
> I would like to question the reasoning behind wanting to "own" the RFC
> content: We don't require any such thing for any other kind of PR although
> we say we require a patch on bugsnet, we actually don't require it. So, I
> have a ha
On Sun, Nov 3, 2019, 7:30 AM Benjamin Eberlei wrote:
>
> Outside pull requests don't live in php-src.git, because they are provided
> by different remotes and these are not as far as I see mirrored back in any
> way to php.net git.
>
> So the question Joe poses is right, pull request descriptions
On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 9:03 PM Johannes Schlüter wrote:
> On Sat, 2019-11-02 at 19:40 +0100, Joe Watkins wrote:
> > I would like to question the reasoning behind wanting to "own" the
> > RFC content: We don't require any such thing for any other kind of PR
> > although we say we require a patch o
On Sat, 2019-11-02 at 19:40 +0100, Joe Watkins wrote:
> I would like to question the reasoning behind wanting to "own" the
> RFC content: We don't require any such thing for any other kind of PR
> although we say we require a patch on bugsnet, we actually don't
> require it. So, I have a hard time
Evening Nikita,
This is not really what we imagined when we started to discuss using github
for pull requests - everything is going to end up on the wiki anyway.
I do think this is a very reasonable first step, given how the discussion
went on github and given the general feeling that we ought to
Hi internals,
Now that the union types RFC is drawing to a close, I think it's time to
discuss the question of RFCs in GitHub pull requests again. Overall I'm
fairly pleased with how this went and would like to adopt the process in
some form.
In particular, I would like to start with the followin
20 matches
Mail list logo
