Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:75278 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 89538 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2014 08:21:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 6 Jul 2014 08:21:32 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lester@lsces.co.uk; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lester@lsces.co.uk; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lsces.co.uk from 217.147.176.214 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.147.176.214 mail4-2.serversure.net Linux 2.6 Received: from [217.147.176.214] ([217.147.176.214:53387] helo=mail4.serversure.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id F0/A0-16090-A0709B35 for ; Sun, 06 Jul 2014 04:21:31 -0400 Received: (qmail 15975 invoked by uid 89); 6 Jul 2014 08:21:27 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.3.1 ppid: 15965, pid: 15971, t: 0.0792s scanners: attach: 1.3.1 clamav: 0.96/m:52 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.0.0.8?) (lester@rainbowdigitalmedia.org.uk@81.138.11.136) by mail4.serversure.net with ESMTPA; 6 Jul 2014 08:21:27 -0000 Message-ID: <53B90707.40503@lsces.co.uk> Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2014 09:21:27 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <61EEC54E-7B8D-433E-A391-75F8D6A41E79@ajf.me> <650742796f119ed972a688a58e02242b@mail.gmail.com> <1e8b4df08c14971746946ed85ca8fa22@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1e8b4df08c14971746946ed85ca8fa22@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Name of Next Release of PHP From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) On 06/07/14 02:13, Zeev Suraski wrote: > I still absolutely think we should bury this until later in the project’s > lifecycle as our energy **right now** is probably much better spent > elsewhere. The problem with that statement is just how do you identify what material one is looking at relates to the 'current' PHPNext? My only argument for not using 'PHP6' is simply that there is a substantial volume of material, printed and otherwise, related to all the discussions on PHP6. We now have discussion on phpng which ring fences that particular development fork, and phpnext is also being used, but using that then creates a problem with next+1. As with windows development with branches like NT and Vista, strict adherence to a number sequence is not essential, but we need some cleanly identifiable tag for the current 'next' discussions simply to remove the dross? *IS* phpng a fore gone conclusion as the base of phpnext? So has this debate already been decided and are we now working on phpng only anyway? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk