Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:102879 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 72254 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2018 06:57:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 17 Jul 2018 06:57:24 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=me@kelunik.com; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=me@kelunik.com; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain kelunik.com from 81.169.146.219 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: me@kelunik.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 81.169.146.219 mo4-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de Received: from [81.169.146.219] ([81.169.146.219:15572] helo=mo4-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id FF/B4-37178-1539D4B5 for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 02:57:23 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1531810639; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=kelunik.com; h=Cc:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:From:In-Reply-To:References: X-RZG-CLASS-ID:X-RZG-AUTH:From:Subject:Sender; bh=sgEshVFduL+HoH3r47RFZ4ldCKEQIA6Tafof0xTLSJQ=; b=RHSkQmqgqCZZ4hbJK8o/Z08vY0/8xGbWWYTlIDx61ikMyka59qK+kjJquBxZ4GH8M+ tU7/afFmKTJfjZLaNF+7h0/dVPlR0IT24wujGr4AULpsZxDwsUIPM4235Z5EbpbuPkhd uMm6DC/K3v514t65rdmBSZfvPf6UoSvZndsxppfcjkcfNs0xh+7Bny2f3WfbhlhwTzCl 9bxfmmk79+tdFsqhxWrlxCwDdl+2py+U2wVhP64aojwXMOe0vT4JAIA37Ktn6vMUYYw4 56zQ7E9DyFGxRjpLiaFuXniMbR5jNAaSYSVxeGx4KzTpDW4+mIwiCByet3Gx7um+4X6Q wo7A== X-RZG-AUTH: ":IWkkfkWkbvHsXQGmRYmUo9mlsGbEv0XHBzMIJSS+jKTzde5mDb8Db2nURiS2cA==" X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo00 Received: by mail-yw0-f181.google.com with SMTP id r184-v6so14728ywg.6 for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 23:57:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFP+1f2VKdTbxxwRtfXoIImM2SGH7Ndg9RnBY2XtmpL2qn3Velw /AJ5xg6R4M2HPGIVJAXhfBvtl0TA3hLM2ij5Q8k= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpcZpOKJuhFIfHSid1oK29zwELBOs56pN9n9ZJ8OcoNVWxJpSpsQGchJIIX72zW5ysY/u7XBK3SiILtvBKSgxyE= X-Received: by 2002:a81:94c5:: with SMTP id l188-v6mr156031ywg.463.1531810637927; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 23:57:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 08:57:05 +0200 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: Zeev Suraski , Nikita Popov Cc: PHP Internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000efdb3405712c740b" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Typed Properties From: me@kelunik.com (Niklas Keller) --000000000000efdb3405712c740b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Zeev Suraski schrieb am Di., 17. Juli 2018, 00:10: > > Based on the feedback we received, we have decided to target PHP 7.4 for > this > > RFC. A main factor for this decision was that the RFC requires some > non-trivial > > changes to 3rd-party extensions for full compatibility. This would put > the > > ongoing (but nearly complete) effort to port extensions to PHP 7.3 back > to > > square one. > > As I mentioned beforehand, I think it's good it wasn't rushed into 7.3 and > at the same time sorry it's not being targeted for 8.0. > > > Now that the target version is decided and the last open questions in > the RFC > > have been resolved, we plan to open voting tomorrow. > > IMHO one of the key reasons for not putting it into 7.3 was the fact that > very little discussion about the actual proposal actually happened because > it arrived so late in the 7.3 release cycle. Most of the discussion under > the Typed Properties thread actually had to do with whether or not it > should go into 7.3, 7.4 or 8.0 - and not about the specifics of the > proposal. I skimmed through the thread and found just a handful of > responses that dealt with the specific of the proposals - most of them > unanswered (unless I'm missing some internals email somehow). > > With this in mind, I think that now that the meta parts are finalized, we > should allow a bit more time for real meaningful discussion about the > proposal to happen. I understand that you don't want to delay this to a > later time in the 7.4 process, but delaying it by a week or so will allow > people to actually review the proposal in more detail without the > uncertainty that surrounded it beforehand - and perhaps have their concerns > addressed. Given that 7.4's finalization date is a year away, and there > are no conflicting RFCs in the queue - a week will not have any sort of > negative influence on the proposal, but might have some positive impact on > its contents. > > Zeev > I'd also like to ask for a further discussion period. Seems like there is quite some discussion going on right now. Regards, Niklas > --000000000000efdb3405712c740b--