Re: Status of PSR-12 survey

We won't keep survey data private for sure. It will be in the meta. PSR-1 and PSR-2 went far beyond FIG-member projects so I guess PSR-12 could be alike in terms of scope. On Wednesday, August 3, 2016 at 5:34:28 PM UTC+3, pmjones wrote: > > > > On Aug 3, 2016, at 09:07, glen-84

Re: Status of PSR-12 survey

On 08/01/2016 01:32 AM, Andrew Carter wrote: Some projects still don't use PSR-2 because of the hell involved in changing style guide mid project when you have hundreds of pull requests. PSR-2 didn't have the option of being prescriptive. Additionally, the "lowest common denominator only"

Re: Status of PSR-12 survey

Some projects still don't use PSR-2 because of the hell involved in changing style guide mid project when you have hundreds of pull requests. PSR-2 didn't have the option of being prescriptive. The job of the FIG is to solve problems by working together? These projects are the community, so if

Re: Status of PSR-12 survey

On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Andrew Carter wrote: > The objection to being prespective rather than descriptive makes > absolutely no sense - and I couldn't disagree any more. > Which is the intent of the FIG? To provide an after-the-fact decision on how things

Re: Status of PSR-12 survey

The objection to being prespective rather than descriptive makes absolutely no sense - and I couldn't disagree any more. All of the projects in this group writing PHP 7 code will (hopefully) *need to develop their own style guide anyway* - save the work, and create one together now. Don't

Re: Status of PSR-12 survey

On 31 Jul 2016 8:28 p.m., "'Alexander Makarov' via PHP Framework Interoperability Group" wrote: > > While I agree that it could be a good idea to wait till PHP7 adoption and usage rate will raise, I think that it would be better if PSR-12 current state (master) will

Re: Status of PSR-12 survey

Hi all, Prevention is better than cure. So I guess it will be good to push than wait for people to write what they want and later argue and wait. I agree with Paul that there can be drawbacks, but we can always change / move to another PSR as we did for PSR-0 to PSR-4 and also erratas. -- You

Re: Status of PSR-12 survey

On 31 Jul 2016 19:58, "Paul Jones" wrote: > > > > On Jul 31, 2016, at 13:36, Michael Cullum wrote: > > > > Hi Paul, > > > > A mix of the two. > > Well, let's remove one part of that mix, then. > > > > As previously stated, this PSR was always going to

Re: Status of PSR-12 survey

> On Jul 31, 2016, at 13:36, Michael Cullum wrote: > > Hi Paul, > > A mix of the two. Well, let's remove one part of that mix, then. > As previously stated, this PSR was always going to include a degree of both > being prescriptive and being descriptive, Yes, and

Re: Status of PSR-12 survey

Hi Paul, A mix of the two. As previously stated, this PSR was always going to include a degree of both being prescriptive and being descriptive, most projects do not yet require PHP 7 but for those that do, then of course that will apply, for those that don't it is essentially asking them what

Re: Status of PSR-12 survey

Hi Glen, The PSR-12 team are just finishing off the survey (Emails were circulated about ti just earlier today as it happens), after which it should be in an almost ready to go state. Without making a promise, I'd predict it is possible that it could be in review before the end of August or

Status of PSR-12 survey

Hi, It seems that non-members can no longer access the IRC channel, so I'll ask here: Is there any news WRT the official survey for PSR-12? IIRC, there was talk about this almost 8 months ago, possibly even earlier than that. PHP 7.1 is already in beta, and we still don't have consensus on