Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:41034
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 64.99.136.138 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <017f01c92e41$9a2b2300$3ffc1f3e@foxbox>
To: "Josh Davis" <phpwnd@gmail.com>
Cc: "Stanislav Malyshev" <stas@zend.com>,
	"PHP internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <696583.1217.qm@web707.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <48F4E520.5050200@lsces.co.uk> <48F4E824.7020104@zend.com> <002901c92e2f$acdac990$3ffc1f3e@foxbox> <48F4F160.1040407@zend.com> <004d01c92e35$20c9cbd0$3ffc1f3e@foxbox> <48F4F7EE.2030609@zend.com> <007b01c92e37$b2952e90$3ffc1f3e@foxbox> <48F4FAF4.50509@zend.com> <00e101c92e3c$d5194b90$3ffc1f3e@foxbox> <11c607a60810141401h6d69f5e3r6bd1f25cb07a58bb@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2008 22:12:43 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] namespaces and alpha3
From: steph@php.net ("Steph Fox")

Hi Josh,

> I'd like to point out that those people started working with
> namespaces *before* the idea of dropping them (or postponing them to
> PHP 6) appeared on the list. I doubt those people would have done the
> same if they had been told that namespaces may very well not be
> available until PHP 6.

Surely everyone can see the very public ongoing discussions on internals@ 
over the course of this and last year?

> Namespace support in 5.3 received quite a lot of coverage this year
> through blogs, articles and presentations, that's why some people
> started implementing them or prepared to migrate their codebase. Now
> if they're told it's postponed indefinitely (until PHP 6 gets a
> tentative schedule) they'll feel burned and they'll think twice before
> investing any time in testing new features in future releases.

There's a very big difference between 'testing' and 'preparing to migrate a 
codebase'.

> I think that's what Stas meant, people would not take the risk to
> implement such extensive changes without the assurance that namespace
> will be available. Those who already did were pretty sure that 5.3
> would have namespaces.

And of course those same people don't mind a bit if the implementation has 
changed 8 times in the last 6 months, because they understand that they're 
testing a moving target. No?

- Steph