Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:93096
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain pthreads.org from 209.85.161.178 cause and error)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAL=_i_=dRcyRMq_OvH8FmDb_wJkF7FwKxRccfv_uFJ06AO9B-g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL=_i_kQevKrMVXchR+OmysRuhvcPPgnQM1zK=oXc8De5e4Q+A@mail.gmail.com>
	<1dc945df-deb9-8bb7-f1ad-da891459339b@telia.com>
	<CANaX5nfaVQZ7OpN_GVXNtZJah+xf0Bz++=vxf3CTKiFoWOYSoA@mail.gmail.com>
	<63abf5c7-5531-f295-befc-ec1839aa944f@telia.com>
	<CANaX5ndn0Rh8CLaHKvNT4doJkphFFG_9j58NVt0KyQ2vPEzyiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<ce2ec669-e177-cbf8-890d-198d9e9f52ea@telia.com>
	<CAL=_i_=dRcyRMq_OvH8FmDb_wJkF7FwKxRccfv_uFJ06AO9B-g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 May 2016 08:25:40 +0100
Message-ID: <CAL=_i_nqb5KC959TPg+-=FyrEkRABZ9buuPYrohWKAhsJAn2Qw@mail.gmail.com>
To: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c0b176ab045100532275dde
Subject: Fwd: [PHP-DEV] Looking (not very far) ahead to PHP 7.1
From: pthreads@pthreads.org (Joe Watkins)

--94eb2c0b176ab045100532275dde
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Joe Watkins <pthreads@pthreads.org>
Date: Fri, May 6, 2016 at 8:23 AM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Looking (not very far) ahead to PHP 7.1
To: Bj=C3=B6rn Larsson <bjorn.x.larsson@telia.com>
Cc: Davey Shafik <davey@php.net>


Morning,

   PHP 5 has been with us for a long time, towards the end of it's life, it
didn't make much sense to have protracted pre-release periods.

   PHP 7 has been with us for no time at all, about 5 minutes; It still
creates a fair amount of core (/Zend) bugs, and there are only a few people
who are able, or who bother, to search for and or resolve such bugs.

   An RFC does not *need* to be accompanied by an implementation (for some
reason), so we can't very well say "no more RFC after X". All we are
concerned about is the implementation that accompanies the RFC.

   Everyone should move forward with their RFC, and voting, in the
knowledge that if the implementation is not ready for Beta 1, it's too
late.

   Worth noting that we're only really talking about the feature kind of
RFC: If some internal problem is found that requires an RFC discussion to
resolve and choose a solution for, no problem - that's what we should be
doing at this point.

   We don't really need to be any more restrictive than that.

   I quite often supply patches for RFC discussions, I get that it's
annoying for someone to say "staph". I get that 7 is shiny, it's easy to
implement complex features, I get that we all waited a long time for such a
platform.

   I also get that 7.2 is going to be a thing :)

Cheers
Joe



On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 9:58 PM, Bj=C3=B6rn Larsson <bjorn.x.larsson@telia.c=
om>
wrote:

> Ok, well I guess there is always room to change at alpha1 when
> all RFC's should be on the table. Agree that 7.1 looks like a busy
> release :-)
>
> I mean, earlier (5.6 & maybe also 7.0) no new RFC's introduced
> after alpha1 and voting closed by first beta. Same strategy in 7.1?
> Cheers //Bj=C3=B6rn
>
>
> Den 2016-05-05 kl. 22:53, skrev Davey Shafik:
>
> Bjorn,
>
> I had the same suggestion, but Joe has convinced me that due to the amoun=
t
> and extent of changes we'd rather have more than we need, than too few!
>
> - Davey
>
> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Bj=C3=B6rn Larsson <bjorn.x.larsson@telia=
.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Aha, I see & tnx. It's not on the front-page so I missed it.
>>
>> One reflection is that you have similar amount of
>> alpha / beta / RC steps like for 7.0 that was a major
>> release. Looking at todo lists on 5.x. the numbers of
>> steps are smaller. On the other hand 7.1 seems like
>> a busy release with typed properties etc
>>
>> Just my 5c...
>>
>> Cheers //Bj=C3=B6rn
>> Den 2016-05-05 kl. 22:36, skrev Davey Shafik:
>>
>> The same one used for the vote is where we are currently working. Nothin=
g
>> is set in stone yet!
>>
>> https://wiki.php.net/todo/php71
>>
>> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:35 PM, Bj=C3=B6rn Larsson <
>> <bjorn.x.larsson@telia.com>bjorn.x.larsson@telia.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Short question, will you make a todolist like for 7.0 on:
>>> - https://wiki.php.net/todo
>>>
>>> And good luck with the work as RMs! Already looking
>>> forward to 7.1 with some exciting content.
>>>
>>> Regards //Bj=C3=B6rn Larsson
>>>
>>>
>>> Den 2016-05-05 kl. 18:26, skrev Joe Watkins:
>>>
>>>> Afternoon internals,
>>>>
>>>>      We are hoping for alpha 1 to be available on June 9th, this is a
>>>> little
>>>> over 5 weeks away.
>>>>
>>>>      Beta 1 (~1 month after alpha 1) on July 7th will be our feature
>>>> freeze
>>>> date - no new RFC's can target 7.1 after this date.
>>>>
>>>>      PHP 7.1 has many things targeting it at the moment, some
>>>> overlapping,
>>>> all of them in various states.
>>>>
>>>>      So that the dust is allowed to settle during beta phase, we need =
to
>>>> insist that anything that does not have an implementation by the time
>>>> beta
>>>> 1 comes be pushed back to 7.2.
>>>>
>>>>      If you are working on a core (/Zend) feature right now, especiall=
y
>>>> draft (unannounced) features, and are targeting 7.1, as a matter of
>>>> courtesy (not requirement), I'd like to ask you to move forward,
>>>> post-haste. It would be good (although not required) if we could get
>>>> /Zend
>>>> stuff merged before alpha 1 ... I realize this may be a pipe dream. I'=
m
>>>> new
>>>> at this, and still have dreams ...
>>>>
>>>>      TL:DR, dates for diary:
>>>>
>>>>          Alpha 1              June 9th
>>>>          Beta 1 (freeze)    July 7th
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> Joe
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>
>

--94eb2c0b176ab045100532275dde--