Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:56100
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.216.170 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: ircmaxell@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <CAFst3WrQW5JrykNPi6eK4L4ctR8P-oUQdDV64spNQm4GTmRKNQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALa-LwbbENc-ZQ=+5SJdA0P3Oa5mH6sJmvhYTm30J2p+9Sg5zg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAFp73XtO7rY-U+4o+zRLMmVRNGhVa_Rdd-fN-eyGrLE2Ou-PPQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAFst3WrQW5JrykNPi6eK4L4ctR8P-oUQdDV64spNQm4GTmRKNQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 10:50:21 -0500
Message-ID: <CAAyV7nEihFnGLJj16E_4-k8o8KZTVNHaiCkH7v7dAO-7U1DJig@mail.gmail.com>
To: Klaus Silveira <contato@klaussilveira.com>
Cc: "guilhermeblanco@gmail.com" <guilhermeblanco@gmail.com>, David Coallier <davidc@php.net>, 
	internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase
From: ircmaxell@php.net (Anthony Ferrara)

Well, my only concern with splitting it into the three questions is
that the RFC specifically mentioned putting it in SPL.

So there wasn't really any discussion or RFC of either of the other
two points.  While it's not really a big deal, I think that #3 at
least requires some more discussion as it does open some doors (both
good and bad) that are completely different from #1 or #2.

I don't think the voting is vague at all.  The RFC was to put the
class loader into SPL.  So that's what's being voted on.  No more, no
less.  Adding different options and votes at this point would at least
partially undermine the RFC process (as in voting without time for
comment)...

I do disagree *slightly* with the language though (I think it should
say "Should SplClassLoader be a feature in PHP 5.4 and in SPL" instead
of "Do you want".  Because I think there are at least some people who
want it, but agrees that it doesn't belong in its current form (at
least some I've talked to).  It's barely even worth pointing out, but
since I'm writing the email anyway...

Just my opinion,

Anthony Ferrara

On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Klaus Silveira
<contato@klaussilveira.com> wrote:
> I agree with Guilherme on this one. The voting objective seems very vague
> currently.
>
> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 12:29 PM, guilhermeblanco@gmail.com <
> guilhermeblanco@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'd rather suggest to split this poll into 3 questions:
>>
>> 1- The same as you wrote. Having it in SPL and in PHP 5.4
>> 2- Have it in PHP 5.4 as an external extension (FIG, PSR or PSG),
>> enabled by default.
>> 3- As an external extension, disabled by default. This would require
>> PHP core to reserve the namespace for us.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 11:41 AM, David Coallier <davidc@php.net> wrote:
>> > Hey everyone,
>> >
>> > After lengthy discussions and various opinion, we believe this issue
>> > has been discussed at length and the PSR-0 has had this standard
>> > effective for the past 1.5 year.
>> >
>> > The SplClassLoader RFC has moved to "voting" stage. Please cast your
>> > votes at https://wiki.php.net/rfc/splclassloader/vote
>> >
>> > Thank you very much for all the interest showed so far,
>> >
>> > --
>> > David Coallier
>> >
>> > --
>> > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>> > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Guilherme Blanco
>> Mobile: +55 (11) 8118-4422
>> MSN: guilhermeblanco@hotmail.com
>> S=E3o Paulo - SP/Brazil
>>
>> --
>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Klaus Silveira
> (011) 8564-2492
> www.klaussilveira.com
>