Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:85639
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 212.27.42.2 as permitted sender)
Reply-To: <francois@php.net>
To: "'Ferenc Kovacs'" <tyra3l@gmail.com>
Cc: "'Dennis Birkholz'" <dennis@birkholz.biz>,
	"'PHP Internals'" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <CAH-PCH74+2-S2ySME1X5QW5rA9Jb5=1T+hJ3t1sxHiaTO31RJA@mail.gmail.com>	<551BC7CF.3080309@birkholz.biz>	<02f101d06c6e$3790c020$a6b24060$@php.net> <CAH-PCH7oeAPSR=MnXbx4pf6bOy_QON9exay_68rgbwxNQUqOAg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAH-PCH7oeAPSR=MnXbx4pf6bOy_QON9exay_68rgbwxNQUqOAg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2015 18:28:37 +0200
Message-ID: <030a01d06c98$e84725b0$b8d57110$@php.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thread-Index: AQIZ+jDGdyrFO2cHYjlP05/PNTH2cAKYC5AAA3FgjHQCUHIWR5xiYHiw
Content-Language: fr
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] What's our official stance on small self-contained additions in a micro version
From: francois@php.net (=?utf-8?Q?Fran=C3=A7ois_Laupretre?=)

> De : Ferenc Kovacs [mailto:tyra3l@gmail.com]
>
> I could accept any decision between holding off new features until =
next=20
> minor/major and allowing features explicitly without going through an =
RFC, but I=20
> want to have an explicit definition on what is allowed and how should =
the case-
> by-case process work.

The release process document is clear : "New features or additions to =
the core should go through the RFC process." (hopefully considering the =
'core' as the whole PHP distribution). It would be better using "must" =
instead of "should" but it is quite clear.

So, providing "a room for exceptions on a case by case basis and only =
for small self-contained features and additions" does not mean that =
these features don't have to go through an RFC. There is nothing to add =
to the rules, we just need to have them enforced by people who currently =
merge new features without demanding an approved RFC. If everyone =
respects the rules, the 'case by case process' is clear, it means =
'approved through an RFC'. Only bug fixes with no side effect can be =
merged without an RFC.

So, once again, as https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/1145 clearly did =
not follow the rules and was not approved in any way, I'm asking whoever =
merged it to revert the change and ask the author to go through an RFC.

Regards

Fran=C3=A7ois