Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:102613
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: softfail (pb1.pair.com: domain golemon.com does not designate 209.85.208.47 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: php@golemon.com
In-Reply-To: <bd79bc16-ff3d-1c9b-a775-9c50c422b8a2@gmx.de>
References: <CAF+90c_L7S+EB8YxdNNpNZ7NhhYwCbwEw5_TSnSwUNN-zLVvCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <b4a9394a-184f-906a-0e34-c14cf8172666@gmail.com> <CA+kxMuQk_5KJT5RPK6B2+4whS1Wz4NTxLDAhXkc0uSurxPNLPw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAESVnVrFsZCEbwTTs+ROF19nHh6=XN6dhHJqxVw5EKa5bK5ngA@mail.gmail.com>
 <c2b3a7b2-b4b6-db88-a7c7-5a08fed0d8a4@telia.com> <CAF+90c8tNO1SsMjGnW9tGPGHtY4kD07SNS-qC_LfkVXVsp0GUA@mail.gmail.com>
 <10e578d7-7a24-3ca0-ca0d-d5ed1a39dca3@telia.com> <80a8f588-05a3-48e5-bf40-bf1685b3105e@gmx.de>
 <CAF+90c-gOKrnHtLv1oJuHQ9QWxYjEZHwAzzaUL0c18x48=HezQ@mail.gmail.com> <bd79bc16-ff3d-1c9b-a775-9c50c422b8a2@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2018 14:41:25 -0400
Message-ID: <CAESVnVpHhKPBsTQgu=4u3UPC1oF_e6-iW9_njbq+09WTQb+Oqw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@gmx.de>
Cc: Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>, "stas@php.net" <stas@php.net>, 
	=?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn_Larsson?= <bjorn.x.larsson@telia.com>, 
	Dan Ackroyd <danack@basereality.com>, Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>, 
	Marco Pivetta <ocramius@gmail.com>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Typed Properties
From: pollita@php.net (Sara Golemon)

On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 11:37 AM, Christoph M. Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> wrote:
>>> Is there any precendent for postponing feature freeze during the (late)
>>> alpha stage?
>>
>> This was done for the PHP 7.1 release at pretty much the same time (before
>> the beta1 release it was decided to go with another alpha instead), for
>> much the same reasons (pending RFCs, though I don't remember the
>> specifics). See https://externals.io/message/94330 for the announcement
>> mail.
>
> Ah, thanks, Nikita!  Considering this, I'm not against delaying beta1
> for two weeks and having an alpha4, provided that we do not allow any
> new (i.e. not yet under discussion) RFC to target 7.3.
>
> Stas, what do you think?
>
It's up to a combination of internals@ opinion, and RM best-judgement.
I for one, see no issue with pushing FF out (we can do an alpha4, even
an alpha5).  On the other end we have the option of reducing the
number of RCs, or pushing GA by the same delay.  FTR; I'd favor
pushing GA out over shortening the RC cycle, but I wouldn't lose sleep
if we wanted to keep the GA date where it is.

-Sara