On 27/07/14 07:23, Kris Craig wrote: > Here's my question to counter yours, Michael: What's the rush?
I think that the only 'objection' I have to 'simply' merging phpng is that it is not just a 'single' change? This vote is all or nothing, so every change is bundled without a vote on particular elements. That many elements ARE simply improvements to the speed at which things are processed is not the problem here, and it may well be that the changes that do affect BC have a practical justification, but there will not be a discussion on that? I'm currently fighting a problem due to a blanket change to a number of systems, which offer a vast speed improvement, but now apparently make it impossible to identify the location of the client machine. The change to VDI is a done deal but nobody on site seems to be interested in fixing the resulting problem :( Due diligence would have addressed the problem beforehand and could well have steered things a different way. The 'rush' with phpng is that people need to have a stable base to be working with, and if php-next is to be phpng, then we need to be working with it. If I magically found some spare time today should I be looking at the current code base or phpng going forward? Documentation IS crucial here, and documenting those changes and providing information where an individual change affects BC is essential, but there should be some mechanism to review elements that are not so clear cut? IS_BOOL object container against IS_TRUE and IS_FALSE new values is probably not a good example, but it is a change that I don't currently see full rational behind ... if I create a bool container I don't know which value it is ... We do not want to complicate things by voting on each element, but it's the simple fact that so many elements have been re-engineered without the normal process that is causing irritation, so some agreement that if questions are raised about an element then it WILL get a proper discussion and if justified get reverted? I think that this is part of the debate on 2/3rds or 50-50 ... there are elements which would normally be a 2/3rds decision? So there should be an agreement that these can be reviewed again later? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
