Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:83214 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 71553 invoked from network); 19 Feb 2015 16:04:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 19 Feb 2015 16:04:40 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lester@lsces.co.uk; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lester@lsces.co.uk; spf=permerror; 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] ([217.147.176.214:58618] helo=mail4.serversure.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 1E/80-18870-69906E45 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2015 11:04:38 -0500 Received: (qmail 13563 invoked by uid 89); 19 Feb 2015 16:04:34 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.3.1 ppid: 13545, pid: 13558, t: 0.0868s scanners: attach: 1.3.1 clamav: 0.96/m:52/d:10677 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.0.0.8?) (lester@rainbowdigitalmedia.org.uk@86.189.147.37) by mail4.serversure.net with ESMTPA; 19 Feb 2015 16:04:34 -0000 Message-ID: <54E60992.30707@lsces.co.uk> Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 16:04:34 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <96c56f257e003e0639bc0e1d32cb4469@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <96c56f257e003e0639bc0e1d32cb4469@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Using Other Channels (was Scalar Type Declarations v0.5) From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) On 19/02/15 15:21, Zeev Suraski wrote: > Focusing on my email to Sara (and several others), there is NOTHING, nothing > wrong with a bit of private communications trying to gauge support, > opposition, gaps and sort out differences before going for a public > discussion. My original comment was on the basis that we have had too much 'we agreed on list X' and I think a lot of the underlying discussion while voluminous here has lost some of the critical fine detail ... because it has not been copied here. Currently 0.4 and 0.5 versions are still being discussed, but neither relax the weak/strict debate which is apparently so essential in other forums? -- 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