On 09/01/2016 01:50 PM, Paul Jones wrote:
All,
On consideration, this strikes me as a perfect example of something that should be
created as a *-interop project prior to being accepted. That will help "shake
out" any problems revealed by real-world use, especially use by people not
participating in the creation of the PSR.
On consideration, forcing it to be an "outside group" from FIG first
would add absolutely no value whatsoever to the process or the spec. It
being under the FIG name in no way prevents or discourages anyone from
"trying it out" if they wish, and the Review period (current status) is
exactly for further "try it out". FIG 3's Review period includes an
explicit requirement for it.
Paul, given your clear and stated desire to keep FIG limited to its 2009
definition (despite your own work on innovative specs) I really do not
know how to interpret your desire to "split the baby" by disbanding FIG
in practice if not in name. "You must work elsewhere first" (aka,
independent interop groups) as a policy is effectively the same thing as
just disbanding FIG outright.
Do you have any technical feedback on the spec itself?
--Larry Garfield
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP
Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/bda24b2f-cd4d-ae4f-79b8-eb56e19b1d4f%40garfieldtech.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
