On 21/07/14 08:41, Kris Craig wrote: >> 1. The vote started with no real case for PHP 7 in there. I made >> > it clear in past weeks I intended to write one, and said it would take >> > time. The supposed ‘case for PHP 7’ that was added there by PHP 6 >> > proponents, is now turning out to be a further case for PHP 6. >> > > Agreed. You should have been the one to write that section. Ultimately, > you were. I haven't been following this very closely (though I am now). > If I'd known when it came to a vote that you still hadn't had a chance to > write your section, I would have asked that the vote be cancelled to give > you more time.
Since the ORIGINAL RFC was for 'PHP6' or 'Not PHP6' without any particular proposed alternative it was basically already floored. Many of the reasons for not using PHP6 were all about breaking the versioning system. Currently the debate has changed and the question left is a simple one. Did PHP6 ever exist as a version? Since even the case for using PHP6 states the fact that PHP6 was abandoned in 2010 it does acknowledge that PHP6 has already been used as a version, so weakens it's own case. Removing that statement now would be inappropriate? So the discussion is not so much PHP6 or PHP7, but rather do we reopen the PHP6 branch again ... or honour the previous closing of that branch. -- 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
