Sorry about that, Roman. I accidentally put you in the wrong group
initially and canceled your invite thinking it was only for that group. You
should have a new invite.
--
Woody Gilk
http://about.me/shadowhand
On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Dracony wrote:
> It says my invite was cancelled
>
>
It says my invite was cancelled
On Sunday, August 14, 2016 at 5:39:57 PM UTC+2, Woody Gilk wrote:
>
> In light of recent discussions regarding having an interop group for
> working PSR-15 and PSR-17, I have created an interop group at
> https://github.com/http-interop
>
> As we work through the
Votes for PHPixie:
Paul 'PMJ' Jones
Samantha Quiñones
Amanda Folson
Jonathan Reinink
Matthew 'Matt' Trask
On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 12:24:40 AM UTC+2, Michael Cullum wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> So for those unaware, it's that time again. Every 8 months a secretary's
> term ends and on this
Also, there is the point of consistency by the FIG itself. If in the past
projects have been barred because of this impasse, and no bylaw exists about
it, why should Aura be treated otherwise?
Last bur not least, I would like to point out that this nomination itself
created a very strange situ
As an administrative note, this awaits Matthew's confirmation before
officially moving into Review.
When the Editor and Sponsors agree that the proposal is ready and that the
> meta document is objective and complete, the Coordinator may promote the
> proposal to Review stage. The promotion must b
As Editor of PSR-13, I hereby turn PSR-13 over to our Coordinator,
Matthew, and declare it ready for Review.
The spec itself is here:
https://github.com/php-fig/fig-standards/blob/master/proposed/links.md
The meta doc is here:
https://github.com/php-fig/fig-standards/blob/master/proposed/link
On 08/11/2016 08:11 AM, Adam Culp wrote:
Thank you for that LOOONG explanation Larry, it did carry value
once I had time to read it. While the -interop approach you wrote
about was not something I was concerned with, the other portions were
useful. Thanks for the time spent.
In regards to
On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Matthieu Napoli wrote:
> so I wonder why we aren't using __invoke in that interface too
>
> That's a very good idea, it might be a good middle ground:
>
>
> interface Next
>
> {
>
> public function __invoke(ServerRequestInterface $request) :
> ResponseInterfac
so I wonder why we aren't using __invoke in that interface too
That's a very good idea, it might be a good middle ground:
interface Next
{
public function __invoke(ServerRequestInterface $request) :
ResponseInterface;
}
I believe the argument MWOP made in the past is that many existing
On 08/14/2016 12:32 PM, Matthieu Napoli wrote:
so I wonder why we aren't using __invoke in that interface too
That's a very good idea, it might be a good middle ground:
interface Next
{
public function __invoke(ServerRequestInterface $request) :
ResponseInterface;
}
I believe the
so I wonder why we aren't using __invoke in that interface too
That's a very good idea, it might be a good middle ground:
interface Next
{
public function __invoke(ServerRequestInterface $request) :
ResponseInterface;
}
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Goo
> On 14 Aug 2016, at 18:08, Matthieu Napoli wrote:
>
> The term "Frame" is extremely confusing, I think it's a big issue with the
> current version. I'm sure if you showed the current signature to PHP
> developers a majority of them would not understand what that parameter is.
This is my fund
Sorry for bringing that topic up again but I'll make it clearer:
*I think the StackInterface should be removed.*
- I don't see what it has to do with PSR-15 (interoperability for *invoking*
middlewares)?
- even if it was a separate PSR, I don't see the problem it is solving (and
the META docume
The term "Frame" is extremely confusing, I think it's a big issue with the
current version. I'm sure if you showed the current signature to PHP
developers a majority of them would not understand what that parameter is.
On the other hand `$response = $next($request)` is so simple and widespread…
Votes for Aura, et al.:
1. Paul 'PMJ' Jones
2. Amanda Folson
3. Samantha Quiñones
4. Jonathan Reinink
5. Matthew 'Matt' Trask
--
Paul M. Jones
http://paul-m-jones.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP
Framework Interoperability Group" group.
In light of recent discussions regarding having an interop group for
working PSR-15 and PSR-17, I have created an interop group at
https://github.com/http-interop
As we work through the details regarding what the interfaces for
PSR-15 and PSR-17 should look like this will serve as the working
draf
Votes for IBMiToolkit
Amanda Folson
Matthew 'Matt' Trask
Samantha Quiñones
Jonathan Reinink
Paul 'PMJ' Jones
Phil Sturgeon
Regards,
Adam Culp
On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 6:24:40 PM UTC-4, Michael Cullum wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> So for those unaware, it's that time again. Every 8 months a secret
Glenn,
Apologies for taking so long to get back to you on this.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Glenn Eggleton wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I want to try to make a case for some changes on the PSR.
>
> I realize it's been through a few iterations, but as a user of psr-7
> middleware I don't see myse
StackInterface is already included in the PSR-15 proposal [1] and
contains the collection of middleware. Passing the entire stack to a
middleware is not a good separation of concerns because a middleware
should not be able to modify the stack once the stack is being
processed.
I am definitely in f
19 matches
Mail list logo
