On 05.02.2019 at 18:51, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>> “Inactive”[1] is likely what you're looking for.
>
> Inactive implies it's not being worked on... But we certainly could move
> there at least ones that are "in discussion" for 2 years.
The description of the section is “This section is for RF
Hi!
> “Inactive”[1] is likely what you're looking for.
Inactive implies it's not being worked on... But we certainly could move
there at least ones that are "in discussion" for 2 years.
--
Stas Malyshev
smalys...@gmail.com
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe
On 05.02.2019 at 18:40, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> Looking at our RFC page, we have over 50 RFCs under discussion. This is
> obviously not true - and can not be true, really, it's impossible to
> properly discuss 50+ RFCs at a time, and indeed most of these aren't
> being currently discussed. I p
On 28.06.2018 at 20:00, Jan Ehrhardt wrote:
> "Christoph M. Becker" in php.internals (Thu, 28 Jun 2018 15:31:25
> +0200):
>
>> There are several RFCs in the âUnder Discussionâ section[1] which target
>> PHP 7.3, even though no discussion had happened during the last weeks if
>> not months. Si
On 28.06.2018 at 20:00, Jan Ehrhardt wrote:
> "Christoph M. Becker" in php.internals (Thu, 28 Jun 2018 15:31:25
> +0200):
>
>> There are several RFCs in the âUnder Discussionâ section[1] which target
>> PHP 7.3, even though no discussion had happened during the last weeks if
>> not months. Si
