On Jul 20, 2014 11:13 PM, Derick Rethans der...@php.net wrote:
On Sun, 20 Jul 2014, Andrea Faulds wrote:
On 20 Jul 2014, at 00:26, Andrea Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
The poll is now open: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/php6#vote
Voting shall end in a week’s time on 2014-07-27.
I’ve
Hi David,
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 2:53 PM, David Muir davidkm...@gmail.com wrote:
Prehashing with sha512 means it is no longer blowfish. It is now a
non-vetted DIY algorithm. The whole point of password_hash is to avoid this
type of thing, and should be clearly discouraged in the
Unsuscribe
On 18 July 2014 15:10, Andrea Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
On 18 Jul 2014, at 12:31, Jon Arano arano@gmail.com wrote:
Were you meaning to say something?
--
Andrea Faulds
http://ajf.me/
All,
As we’re getting closer to release 5.6.0, and given the very high level of
interest in phpng, I think it’s time for us to provide some clarity
regarding what happens post 5.6.0.
Dmitry and I wrote an RFC proposing that we merge phpng into master and
turn it into the basis of the next
See below in red.
It was not accidental and I said so almost immediately after Andrea sent
the note to the list about the paragraphs being removed.
I didn't see that, my bad. The point I was trying to make is that,
whatever the explanation, I think you should be given the benefit of the
hi Zeev,
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
All,
As we’re getting closer to release 5.6.0, and given the very high level of
interest in phpng, I think it’s time for us to provide some clarity
regarding what happens post 5.6.0.
Dmitry and I wrote an RFC
On 21/07/14 08:41, Kris Craig wrote:
1. The vote started with no real case for PHP 7 in there. I made
it clear in past weeks I intended to write one, and said it would take
time. The supposed ‘case for PHP 7’ that was added there by PHP 6
proponents, is now turning out to be a
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com wrote:
hi Zeev,
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
All,
As we’re getting closer to release 5.6.0, and given the very high level of
interest in phpng, I think it’s time for us to provide some
Hi
We need to consider PHP-Next jump as an opportunity to
clean our API and finally have something understandable for a newcomer,
and
documented. That's a move nobody dared to take in the last decade,
degrading more and more our codebase in term of understandability and
flexibility. This
Php interactive shell saves commands history when you exit it using 'quit'.
But it throws all you history away when you exit using Ctrl+C. It is common
practice to save history on SIGINT exit (mysql, mongo, etc.)
I would like to implement SIGINT handler for interactive shell to save
history on
Am 21.07.2014 10:33, schrieb Zeev Suraski:
Regarding Dmitry saying that phpng is an experimental branch - that was a
couple of months ago. It evolved, it runs apps in parity with 5.6, and it's
fine to move it to master right now. The alternative - developing 5.7 on
master and creating a
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 7:56 AM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
The removed paragraphs were actually the RFC’s ‘case for PHP 7’. As the
champion for the PHP 7 case, I was 100.0% entitled to remove it as I
thought it wasn’t doing a good job at presenting that case, and replace it
with
On 21/07/2014, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
Regarding Dmitry saying that phpng is an experimental branch - that was a
couple of months ago. It evolved, it runs apps in parity with 5.6, and
it's
fine to move it to master right now.
Perhaps you could write a summary of what's changed
On 20 Jul 2014 23:32, Andrea Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
On 20 Jul 2014, at 22:28, Nikita Popov nikita@gmail.com wrote:
After the vote has been started the RFC was edited by Zeev in order to
strengthen the case for PHP 7. There is nothing wrong with that, adding
additional arguments to an
Hi all,
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Dmitry Saprykin saprykin.dmi...@gmail.com
wrote:
Php interactive shell saves commands history when you exit it using 'quit'.
But it throws all you history away when you exit using Ctrl+C. It is common
practice to save history on SIGINT exit (mysql,
Hi Julien,
Hi
I can only agree here.
I'd like a clean API. We need to consider PHP-Next jump as an opportunity
to
clean our API and finally have something understandable for a
newcomer, and documented. That's a move nobody dared to take in the
last decade, degrading more and more our
Hi Zeev,
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 4:31 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
As we’re getting closer to release 5.6.0, and given the very high level of
interest in phpng, I think it’s time for us to provide some clarity
regarding what happens post 5.6.0.
Are you willing to have 5.7 branch?
On 21 Jul 2014 10:21, Julien Pauli jpa...@php.net wrote:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com wrote:
hi Zeev,
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
All,
As we’re getting closer to release 5.6.0, and given the very high
Hi all,
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Yasuo Ohgaki yohg...@ohgaki.net wrote:
In old days, crypt() was unusable securely. There are many
users/developers that
are used to have static slat. Code like below disables authentication
completely.
password_hash(hash('sha512',
On 21 Jul 2014 11:24, Yasuo Ohgaki yohg...@ohgaki.net wrote:
Hi all,
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Dmitry Saprykin
saprykin.dmi...@gmail.com
wrote:
Php interactive shell saves commands history when you exit it using
'quit'.
But it throws all you history away when you exit using
Ok, I will NOT ))
God saves us from bureaucracy
On 21 July 2014 13:46, Michael Wallner m...@php.net wrote:
On 21 Jul 2014 11:24, Yasuo Ohgaki yohg...@ohgaki.net wrote:
Hi all,
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Dmitry Saprykin
saprykin.dmi...@gmail.com
wrote:
Php interactive
On Mon, 21 Jul 2014, Zeev Suraski wrote:
As we’re getting closer to release 5.6.0, and given the very high level of
interest in phpng, I think it’s time for us to provide some clarity
regarding what happens post 5.6.0.
Dmitry and I wrote an RFC proposing that we merge phpng into master and
On 21/07/2014 11:13, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Am 21.07.2014 10:33, schrieb Zeev Suraski:
Regarding Dmitry saying that phpng is an experimental branch - that was a
couple of months ago. It evolved, it runs apps in parity with 5.6, and it's
fine to move it to master right now. The alternative
-Original Message-
From: Matteo Beccati [mailto:p...@beccati.com]
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 1:08 PM
To: internals@lists.php.net
Cc: Sebastian Bergmann
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master
To be honest I don't think we're anywhere near the point where it's safe
to
*From:* yohg...@gmail.com [mailto:yohg...@gmail.com] *On Behalf Of *Yasuo
Ohgaki
*Sent:* Monday, July 21, 2014 12:32 PM
*To:* Zeev Suraski
*Cc:* PHP internals
*Subject:* Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master
Hi Zeev,
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 4:31 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
As
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
It's absolutely fine to have separate discussions on cleaning APIs, new
features and any other changes people think we should do, but it absolutely
has nothing to do with phpng moving into master. We can take the
opportunity
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Michael Wallner m...@php.net wrote:
I don't think that a cleanup is nearly as important as php-ng is as we stand
currently.
The will be no mercy from the competition.
We can start reworking the API when it hit master.
Cleanup reduces the work, not
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
*From:* yohg...@gmail.com [mailto:yohg...@gmail.com] *On Behalf Of *Yasuo
Ohgaki
*Sent:* Monday, July 21, 2014 12:32 PM
*To:* Zeev Suraski
*Cc:* PHP internals
*Subject:* Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master
Hi Zeev,
Hi Zeev,
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Matteo Beccati [mailto:p...@beccati.com]
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 1:08 PM
To: internals@lists.php.net
Cc: Sebastian Bergmann
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
Hi Julien,
Hi
I can only agree here.
I'd like a clean API. We need to consider PHP-Next jump as an opportunity
to
clean our API and finally have something understandable for a
newcomer, and documented. That's a move
I don't know how things are driven here, but I assume that OSS projects
don't merge stuff into master until tests pass: it's as simple as that.
That's your blocker right there, regardless of voting or any other
discussion going on.
There’s a huge difference between a major code changes as we
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Ferenc Kovacs tyr...@gmail.com wrote:
He just asks if we will have a 5.7 release while working on the next major
in master.
I don't think that we can release the php-next under a years, so I think
that an 5.7 could be warranted (to keep up with our roadmap),
He just asks if we will have a 5.7 release while working on the next major
in master.
I don't think that we can release the php-next under a years, so I think
that an 5.7 could be warranted (to keep up with our roadmap), but depends
on wether or not we have enough new (BC-safe) features.
I don’t
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
There’s a huge difference between a major code changes as we line up for a
new major version – one that requires widespread testing and community
support – and the relatively minor changes we’ve had here ever since PHP 5.
On Mon, 21 Jul 2014, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
I can only agree here.
I'd like a clean API. We need to consider PHP-Next jump as an
opportunity to clean our API and finally have something
understandable for a newcomer, and documented. That's a move nobody
dared to take in the last
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
He just asks if we will have a 5.7 release while working on the next major
in master.
I don't think that we can release the php-next under a years, so I think
that an 5.7 could be warranted (to keep up with our roadmap), but
Hi Matteo,
We have very limited forces to test everything. Once we we have bug reports
we may look into the problems and fix them.
According to FAST_ZPP part, the commit message and comments in the code
clearly say that this part may be changed in the future.
We should vote for it separately and
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Derick Rethans der...@php.net wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jul 2014, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
I can only agree here.
I'd like a clean API. We need to consider PHP-Next jump as an
opportunity to clean our API and finally have something
understandable for a newcomer,
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
Hi Matteo,
We have very limited forces to test everything. Once we we have bug reports
we may look into the problems and fix them.
According to FAST_ZPP part, the commit message and comments in the code
clearly say that
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Julien Pauli jpa...@php.net wrote:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
Hi Julien,
Hi
I can only agree here.
I'd like a clean API. We need to consider PHP-Next jump as an
opportunity
to
clean our API and
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Dmitry Saprykin
saprykin.dmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, I will NOT ))
God saves us from bureaucracy
Well, Michael's view is known.
However let me explain what RFCs bring, besides bureaucracy.
- clear identification of use cases, incl. edge cases
- better design
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
We thought about it many time, but didn't have time to do it.
cleanup makes code bases smaller, more maintainable, easier to change.
The time spent to port dead parts of PHP should have been better
spent. It is too late to
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
He just asks if we will have a 5.7 release while working on the next major
in master.
I don't think that we can release the php-next under a years, so I think
that an 5.7 could be warranted (to keep up with our roadmap),
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
All,
As we’re getting closer to release 5.6.0, and given the very high level of
interest in phpng, I think it’s time for us to provide some clarity
regarding what happens post 5.6.0.
Dmitry and I wrote an RFC proposing that
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Ferenc Kovacs tyr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
He just asks if we will have a 5.7 release while working on the next major
in master.
I don't think that we can release the php-next under a years, so
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
All,
As we’re getting closer to release 5.6.0, and given the very high level
of
interest in phpng, I think it’s time for us to provide some
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@gmail.com wrote:
There are actually two questions here:
1. Do we want to base the next major version on phpng?
2. Do we want to merge phpng into master?
As of now, I am against both. But as I said earlier I am open as long
as the
Hi Yasuo,
Some times ago I mailed my idea about refactoring random number
generator API with min BC breaks but I didn't create an RFC right now.
see http://marc.info/?l=php-internalsm=137772363015217
Marc
On 16.07.2014 07:13, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
Hi all,
There are few places that uses
On 21 ביול 2014, at 14:20, Ferenc Kovacs tyr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
All,
As we’re getting closer to release 5.6.0, and given the very high level of
Am 21.7.2014 um 12:52 schrieb Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Dmitry Saprykin
saprykin.dmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, I will NOT ))
God saves us from bureaucracy
Well, Michael's view is known.
However let me explain what RFCs bring, besides bureaucracy.
On 21 Jul 2014, at 12:10, Nikita Popov nikita@gmail.com wrote:
The latter is tied to the question whether or not we want to have a PHP 5.7
release in the meantime. I'm not really sure whether or not that would be
good, I would recommend opening a separate thread about that question.
The
-Original Message-
From: Andrea Faulds [mailto:a...@ajf.me]
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 3:55 PM
To: Nikita Popov
Cc: Zeev Suraski; PHP internals
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master
I think we should have a PHP 5.7. There are plenty of things we can
still do in
the
Thank you for clarification. I'm agree with all points. But I think in this
particular case (1 file, 20 lines of code) simple review could be enough.
I'm new in php development and may be I am missing some workflow steps. If
RFC is absolutely necessary I will be happy to create it but I have no
On 21 Jul 2014, at 14:06, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
I'm not sure where the 2-3 years is coming from, but again, I see no
reason why we wouldn't be able to push .NEXT out within a year (if it's
just phpng along then actually a lot less, but I'm allowing time for extra
features we may
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
I'm not sure where the 2-3 years is coming from, but again, I see no
reason why we wouldn't be able to push .NEXT out within a year (if it's
just phpng along then actually a lot less, but I'm allowing time for extra
features
-Original Message-
From: Andrea Faulds [mailto:a...@ajf.me]
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 4:10 PM
To: Zeev Suraski
Cc: Nikita Popov; PHP internals
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master
We *could* make PHP NEXT in a year, sure, but it won't be worthwhile
being
called PHP
On 21 Jul 2014, at 14:47, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
Everything I know about the PHP community, combined with the amazing level
of interest that the recent PHPNG benchmarks garnered, tells me that it
wrong.
People would love to get it even if it was just the performance memory
On Mon, 2014-07-21 at 13:12 +0400, Dmitry Saprykin wrote:
Php interactive shell saves commands history when you exit it using 'quit'.
But it throws all you history away when you exit using Ctrl+C. It is common
practice to save history on SIGINT exit (mysql, mongo, etc.)
I would like to
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
d PHP NEXT.
Everything I know about the PHP community, combined with the amazing level
of interest that the recent PHPNG benchmarks garnered, tells me that it
wrong.
You needed one year+ to stabilize opcache, how long will you
On 21/07/2014 12:41, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
Hi Matteo,
We have very limited forces to test everything. Once we we have bug reports
we may look into the problems and fix them.
I've been trying to help with testing and reporting on IRC the results.
I think I've mentioned Doctrine a few times
On Mon, 21 Jul 2014, Zeev Suraski wrote:
From: Andrea Faulds [mailto:a...@ajf.me]
We *could* make PHP NEXT in a year, sure, but it won't be worthwhile
being called PHP NEXT.
Everything I know about the PHP community, combined with the amazing
level of interest that the recent PHPNG
changed write_history at the end to append_history after
each cli_is_valid_code.
Now it is -1 line, +1 line commit and completely looks like bug fix. )
On 21 July 2014 18:00, Johannes Schlüter johan...@schlueters.de wrote:
On Mon, 2014-07-21 at 13:12 +0400, Dmitry Saprykin wrote:
Php
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
Hi Matteo,
We have very limited forces to test everything. Once we we have bug reports
we may look into the problems and fix them.
Wouldn't it be super easy to use the HHVM team infrastructure to test a
version against
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Benjamin Eberlei kont...@beberlei.de wrote:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
Hi Matteo,
We have very limited forces to test everything. Once we we have bug reports
we may look into the problems and fix them.
Wouldn't
Hey：
在 2014年7月21日，18:56，Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com 写道：
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
We thought about it many time, but didn't have time to do it.
cleanup makes code bases smaller, more maintainable, easier to change.
The time spent to port
Hey:
在 2014年7月21日，19:02，Ferenc Kovacs tyr...@gmail.com 写道：
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
He just asks if we will have a 5.7 release while working on the next major
in master.
I don't think that we can release the php-next under a years, so I think
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 5:36 PM, Xinchen Hui larue...@gmail.com wrote:
发自我的 iPad
在 2014年7月21日，23:30，Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com 写道：
On Jul 21, 2014 5:28 PM, Xinchen Hui larue...@gmail.com wrote:
Or you suggest we stop the current work to waiting them come their self?
This is
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Xinchen Hui larue...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey:
在 2014年7月21日，19:02，Ferenc Kovacs tyr...@gmail.com 写道：
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
He just asks if we will have a 5.7 release while working on the next
major
in
Hey:
I really don't like arguing in english, so this will be my last
reply in this thread.
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 12:10 AM, Ferenc Kovacs tyr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Xinchen Hui larue...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey:
在 2014年7月21日，19:02，Ferenc Kovacs
hi,
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 3:42 AM, Xinchen Hui larue...@gmail.com wrote:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/uniform_variable_syntax
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/size_t_and_int64_next
aren't they discussed and voted? what do you mean by we can't even
start in previous comment?
The int64 yes, that
Hi Anthony,
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Anthony Ferrara ircmax...@gmail.com
wrote:
E_NOTICE for password larger than 72 is mandatory. Current
password_hash()
works without any sign of problem even if it may not be working as
authentication.
I'll add E_NOTICE as bug fix if there
Hi Yasuo,
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 5:00 AM, Yasuo Ohgaki yohg...@ohgaki.net wrote:
Hi Anthony,
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Anthony Ferrara ircmax...@gmail.com
wrote:
E_NOTICE for password larger than 72 is mandatory. Current
password_hash()
works without any sign of problem even if
Hi Zeev,
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 7:18 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
Hi Zeev,
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 4:31 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
As we’re getting closer to release 5.6.0, and given the very high level of
interest in phpng, I think it’s time for us to provide some
On 2014-07-21, Michael Wallner m...@php.net wrote:
--001a11345984e013cd04feb0d9a1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 21 Jul 2014 10:21, Julien Pauli jpa...@php.net wrote:
PHP-Next.
I don't think that a cleanup is nearly as important as
Hi David,
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 2:08 PM, David Soria Parra d...@php.net wrote:
On 2014-07-21, Michael Wallner m...@php.net wrote:
--001a11345984e013cd04feb0d9a1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 21 Jul 2014 10:21, Julien Pauli
Am 7/21/14, 10:21 PM, schrieb Yasuo Ohgaki:
Even if we have PHP-5.7 branch, we have merge up policy. Therefore,
any new feature will end up with master, I suppose. If a new feature is
only available to PHP-5.7 branch, it's a merge bug, isn't it?
Regards,
We had this policy before and
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 2:21 AM, Michael Wallner m...@php.net wrote:
On 20 Jul 2014 23:32, Andrea Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
On 20 Jul 2014, at 22:28, Nikita Popov nikita@gmail.com wrote:
After the vote has been started the RFC was edited by Zeev in order to
strengthen the case
77 matches
Mail list logo
