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 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
