Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:48404 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 8507 invoked from network); 23 May 2010 08:28:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 23 May 2010 08:28:06 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 74.85.23.205 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 74.85.23.205 mail.sugarcrm.net Windows 2000 SP2+, XP SP1 (seldom 98 4.10.2222) Received: from [74.85.23.205] ([74.85.23.205:24475] helo=mail.sugarcrm.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id F9/B6-54147-417E8FB4 for ; Sun, 23 May 2010 04:28:05 -0400 Received: from StasMacBook.local (98.210.181.235) by exch-cupertino1.cup1.sugarcrm.net (10.8.1.103) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.393.1; Sun, 23 May 2010 01:28:01 -0700 Message-ID: <4BF8E710.4070306@sugarcrm.com> Date: Sun, 23 May 2010 01:28:00 -0700 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: References: <548A854F-C5CC-4C7D-A42D-788EACA238DA@roshambo.org> <7.0.1.0.2.20100522175529.0a6019d8@zend.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20100522180909.0a601b20@zend.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] trunk guidelines (was Re: [PHP-DEV] scalar type hinting?) From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > There was a comprehensive discussion on this functionality a few months back > on the mailing list and the overall consensus was that the functionality > made sense (as was committed) but was to late in the game to be part of the > 5.3 branch. So, now that the trunk has been established it went in. I remember that there were opposition to this way of doing it, from myself and other people, and these concerns were never answered adequately. So I consider it being more matter of "better ask forgiveness than permission" that consensus thing. I personally still think that as it is done it is not the best way to do it. My recollection - maybe wrong - was that we wanted to go back to it after 5.3, but wasn't that there was a decision to commit it as-is (even without cleaning out Unicode stuff...) As for discussions on IRC, please remember that not everybody can hang out on IRC, that's why we have internals list. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227