Hey, > I had just twigged myself that that was what you were refering to.
Please keep in mind that my questions here are about general policies, not this particular utility. > Essentially, the "isolation" of this utility is a product of its dependency flexibility, *not* the other way around. Exactly. I don't see how it's relevant that this utility depends on core. This does not cause issues. > Although retro-engineering that framework into our core data classes would be an absolute bitch > if we were rewriting MW from scratch we would most likely use such an abstraction from > the start, and there's no reason not to do so with new core features if practical. This is off topic in this thread as far as I'm concerned. I fully agree though. I am not existing rewriting anything in core at all. I'm suggesting an addition that can be used by extensions for now, and later on for new features in core or for existing ones if someone chooses to migrate them to use this. This is just the same as the introduction of any new utility such as Html or the new logging classes. Except the difference in PHP version, which is what this thread is intended to be about. Cheers -- Jeroen De Dauw http://www.bn2vs.com Don't panic. Don't be evil. -- _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
