Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:71483
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.44 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CADajX4AzUWh4-DALP_-fkpfPB+CMK4NvNJ2ByzmAUz2wGW8n4w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADajX4AzUWh4-DALP_-fkpfPB+CMK4NvNJ2ByzmAUz2wGW8n4w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 07:41:28 +0100
Message-ID: <CAEZPtU6nt=uu5K9DuE9FXwJC_7qHMjYV=GwZkf_EvkHpz-rPuw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adam Harvey <aharvey@php.net>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Ruminations on PHP 5++
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye)

hi Adam!

On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 7:34 AM, Adam Harvey <aharvey@php.net> wrote:
> Internaleers!
>
> We seem to have a few things being discussed at the moment that are
> somewhat beyond the scope of the sorts of changes we've been adding
> since 5.3. (I think the new release and voting processes have
> generally worked well here, incidentally: 5.4 and 5.5 have both been
> releases with a good range of new features, yet haven't caused
> significant pain in terms of BC and have been pretty stable.) Things
> that fall into that category for me include:
>
> 1. size_t and int changes.

really not going to wait 6 for that. But we have another thread to discuss it.



> 4. Dare I say it, better multibyte encoding handling. (I don't want to
> repeat the PHP 6 experience, but I'm also not sold on mbstring-ng
> being the ultimate solution.)

mbstring-ng and full unicode support can be seen as two different
topics. While some parts overlap.

> So here's my question: should we be starting to lay out a rough
> schedule and list of desired features for a new major release? (I'm
> going to call it 5++, since the actual number is controversial; I'd
> prefer 7, but I know there's a school of thought that 6 is usable
> again. Whatever. We can bikeshed that down the track.)

No way for me, 6 never existed and I see no good reason to skip it
just because we failed to make it happen back then. I'm not in
marketing but tech. Also releasing 6 may actually improve our image.
But releasing it as 7 will make us look like clowns again. Let avoid
that.

Cheers,
-- 
Pierre

@pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org