Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:100319
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain genkgo.nl designates 46.21.156.38 as permitted sender)
To: Andrey Andreev <narf@devilix.net>
Cc: Sara Golemon <pollita@php.net>, Lars Strojny <lars@strojny.net>,
 Dan Ackroyd <danack@basereality.com>,
 "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <a4189866-23ea-4dc5-12a4-a7fbad8e5601@genkgo.nl>
 <CA+kxMuToz+RZ4_t_ta7CRzBu98Ts3U5=cTV--SppGKK85STUEA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAESVnVpJ0oy+afKhfhKv1trJtnOLmcWFg=DA1G-TpMxfW3jDqw@mail.gmail.com>
 <ffbba599-83ee-07c1-3b68-42bcd9a90009@genkgo.nl>
 <E7AAE43A-CF2D-45E8-A176-9EAFFFEB93C1@strojny.net>
 <CAESVnVrN-M7uDzB6LqXvL8kDxaOarWKmNKdz8nGYG7v1dOQ_BQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPhkiZxKj6qmHreyO+uHFFomKA9Ta5r9ypnFfEUZaQ0A+tGCJw@mail.gmail.com>
 <cc7d025d-8d9c-1cb3-6c8c-75487992edc5@genkgo.nl>
 <CAPhkiZzm2-G5EoewGQy9yd=2A2DLfgp3-XQ9fbPPwBLBzUB=AQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9422cefb-4dda-9a1d-8856-46ad587f6f60@genkgo.nl>
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 18:10:29 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAPhkiZzm2-G5EoewGQy9yd=2A2DLfgp3-XQ9fbPPwBLBzUB=AQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------1642861975D3C25CA09121E6"
Content-Language: nl-NL
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Same Site Cookie RFC
From: f.bosch@genkgo.nl (Frederik Bosch | Genkgo)

--------------1642861975D3C25CA09121E6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Andrey,

Little misunderstanding then. I agree we can better have this PHP 7.3 
and take some time for it. Current votes also suggest that we should go 
for the array argument implementation. Since there is only a PR for the 
extra argument implementation, it will also take time to have the PR for 
the array argument implementation ready. Taken that into account, we 
should not want this in 7.2.

Best,
Frederik



On 28-08-17 17:58, Andrey Andreev wrote:
> Hi Frederik,
>
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Frederik Bosch | Genkgo
> <f.bosch@genkgo.nl> wrote:
>> Hi Andrey,
>>
>> While I agree on your statement that back-porting is suboptimal, I do not
>> agree on the fact that I said that there was no time to wait. I submitted
>> the RFC, awaited the opinions, changed the document according to the
>> different viewpoints and I link to the other RFC from this RFC. I do not
>> want to 'push' this through. I think we know the opinions, so it is time to
>> vote. If both suggestions from this RFC don't make, then people can go for
>> other solutions.
>>
> You did wait for, and adjust according to suggestions, I'm not questioning that.
>
> I was referring to this message: https://externals.io/message/99884#99893
>
> If you want this to land in 7.2 (i.e. not "take a while before we see
> samesite cookie implemented"), then there really is no time to wait.
> I'm not being negative here ... I'm using this as an argument to make
> the vote for 7.2 now.
> Otherwise, we have an entire year to polish all the details in time for 7.3.
>
> Cheers,
> Andrey.

-- 


    Frederik Bosch


      Partner

Genkgo logo
Mail: f.bosch@genkgo.nl <mailto:f.bosch@genkgo.nl>
Web: support.genkgo.com <https://support.genkgo.com>

Entrada 123
Amsterdam
+31 208 943 931

Genkgo B.V. staat geregistreerd bij de Kamer van Koophandel onder nummer 
56501153

--------------1642861975D3C25CA09121E6--