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 we may want to put in).  As a matter of fact, I don't think we
> can even entertain a 2-3 cycle, it will be way too late to market if we
> linger for so long.
>
> This is the assumption we should take IMHO, and only branch 5.7 (and more
> importantly, invest time in it) if it proves wrong.

This is the assumption we should not take. It is disturbing to see you
pushing again something so hard that it will hurt the whole project.
And this time much harder than in the last times.

It is time to step back and take a realistic view of what is going,
outside your book, which is barely based on your one and only
prioritiy, performance (and only one platform too). This is not PHP,
not what many want. And even I am pretty sure you will make it through
with this totally incomplete RFC based on disputable benchmarks and no
matter how much performance improvements happen with phpng, this is
not the only thing what we should do in next. Even if it was, to think
about being ready in less than a year is a sweet dream, to say it
nicely.

Cheers,
-- 
Pierre

@pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org

-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to