the middleware stack can strip the subpath "/devteam" before passing the
request on to the nested middleware.
Removing this ability would make such nesting far more difficult, making re-use
less palatable.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Woody Gilk wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
> wrote:
>>> It definitely does not need to include the StackInterface. However, I
>>> feel that it is valuable to provide a recommendation for it beca
e for comment-driven
development.
> You did great work with specification.
> However, probably every statement from spec can be programmed very
unambiguously.
The key word here is "probably". Considering we have multiple
implementations that do differ, and which are now generating errata du
On Jun 26, 2016 11:11 PM, "Woody Gilk" wrote:
>
> In light of recent events, I am requesting that PSR-17 (HTTP Factory)
> receive a new sponsor to replace PMJ.
I'd be willing.
-- mwop
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP
Framework Interoperability
On Jun 26, 2016 11:09 PM, "Woody Gilk" wrote:
>
> In light of recent events, I am requesting that PSR-15 (HTTP
> Middleware) receive a new coordinator to replace PMJ.
I'm available.
-- mwop
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP
Framework Interoperab
es, and who it wants to have
involved. I personally value a group that is welcoming of a diverse set of
backgrounds (both professionally and personally), and that is capable of
healthy, respectful debate that can lead to reasonable compromises.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gma
On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Paul Jones wrote:
> - On 08 Jun, Matthew Weier O'Phinney sent an email encouraging me in the
> friendliest possible way to resign. To paraphrase, he opined that I had three
> options: adapt to recent changes and/or submit to proposed changes in FI
ly debating policy. I
think technical discussions tend to bring out his best self.
>
> On Wednesday, July 6, 2016 at 11:43:46 PM UTC+1, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Paul Jones wrote:
>>
>> > - On 08 Jun, Matthew Weie
+1 Zend Framework
On Jul 18, 2016 9:01 AM, "Lukas Kahwe Smith" wrote:
> Aloha,
>
> So given that there didn’t see to be any opposition (then again also no
> support by-side me) for the adoption of pimcore in the original thread
> requesting for addition to the member list, I am not calling for a
d email to php...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/239b7c02-9661-462b-af5f-7da233ce884f%40googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>>
> --
> You
cribed to the Google Groups
> "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com.
>
ic we already
define within the PSR-7 interfaces.
However, Michael Cullum posed the following question: is such a change
considered a *fix* (because it updates the syntax to match intent) or a
*clarification* (which would require a vote)?
Opinions?
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...
; these are,
to my mind, essential tools for anybody filling the role.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP
Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe
On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Ciaran McNulty wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, 3 August 2016 19:54:13 UTC+1, Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
>>
>> That pull request update all `@return self` annotations to `@return
>> static`. To
>> summarize the discussion, `@return st
om this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/CAAqcDMgjqUWMwmsk15FEocNvJx%2B6V
you have a suggestion for a
substantive change, please open a thread to discuss it, so we can
determine whether we need to return to Draft status to address the
change, or whether we will choose to move forward.
Thanks in advance!
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwo
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Paul Jones wrote:
>
>> On Aug 15, 2016, at 12:22, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
>> wrote:
>>
>> Please take some time to review the proposed standard.
>
> Are any member projects currently doing anything that resembles the prop
-11.
We did this with zend-servicemanager, too — our own
ServiceLocatorInterface was compatible with container-interop, so we
modified ours to extend the container-interop interface; users were
then immediately able to use our package anywhere container-interop
was expected, with no BC breaks.
--
l8XOZJkozfI
> [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails fro
want to standardize on what is already
being done, the fact that the calling patterns of existing middleware
dispatchers vary currently means that having a discrete, unique method
ensures greater compatibility once the specification is finalized,
easing the way to adoption by existing libraries.
--
> email to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/CAAqcDMh4JSN1Opsiam8GgjXc1vsTfSuFJ7fEJvtoRoxBxRv_xQ%40mail.gmail.com.
> For mor
ts.
Thanks for the feedback, and we'll post soon regarding the decision
about the collection interface; if we decide to change it, we'll start
a new review period.
> Am Montag, 15. August 2016 19:22:20 UTC+2 schrieb Matthew Weier O'Phinney:
>>
>> As coordin
inator and/or sponsor (in that order!) would only request it in
the absence of an editor. As such, until Larry has proposed
withdrawal, I see no reason to continue discussion at this point.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
You received this message
On Sep 12, 2016 5:31 PM, "Daniel Hunsaker" wrote:
>>
>> >> I'd expect an object implementing a CollectionInterface to be
iterable and
>> >> to already contain the items in question. The current implementation
of the
>> >> LinkCollectionInterface though looks more like a CollectorInterface.
>> >> S
nks for the feedback; your suggestion for changes to the
LinkCollectionInterface may also address the concerns from Andreas;
I'll discuss with Larry later today.
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 11:52 PM Matthew Weier O'Phinney
> wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 12, 2016 5:31 PM,
, or "that's still unclear".
Frankly, if you are unhappy with the way the role is currently defined, then the
onus is on *you* to present a by-law amendment detailing changes that will
define the role in a way that you find acceptable, and then call for a review
and a vote. Don'
On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Paul Jones wrote:
>
> On Sep 15, 2016, at 13:37, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
> wrote:
> > You're creating a false dichotomy, Paul.
>
> Not at all. It might be part assistant, part something else (or perhaps
> multiple somethi
t
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/fd07b8eb-4194-fa4f-9a89-f71bf54aa520%40garfieldtech.com.
>>
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "PHP
om.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/4901900b-32ab-884a-ba3c-ee12023465e6%40garfieldtech.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net
top of that, as he also
notes, since it covers the same domain, the interfaces themselves
would be published under the same package as a different version most
likely anyways.
So, if we have any required changes, we can address those and consider
a new PSR. In the meantime, I hope my explanation
Zend Framework will remain.
On Oct 2, 2016 6:44 PM, "Michael Cullum" wrote:
> As per the FIG 3.0 bylaws, all member projects must, between the 1st
> October and 31st October, declare they wish to remain a member project of
> the FIG. If you don't wish to remain, then it would be useful for you t
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, sen
subscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/d6f3e768-668f-4eb0-a6c5-2a94ad190082%40googlegroups.com.
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.
-interop/container-interop#compatible-projects
Please familiarize yourself with the specification and its scope, and reply on
this thread with any concerns.
Thanks!
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed t
to support the lowest
current supported stable PHP version, which is currently 5.6. As such,
parameter and return type declarations cannot be used yet.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
vers a more generalized set of functionality,
which, more importantly, is already seen in existing implementations,
making it useful to the specification.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the G
voting member projects, which means we must
have 13 votes to pass quorum, with half or more of all votes cast in
favor, in order to approve acceptance of PSR-13.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed t
was asked previously: both HTML and several JSON specifications
use the shortened form "rel". This spec mirrors those.
> On Monday, August 15, 2016 at 7:22:20 PM UTC+2, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
wrote:
>>
>> As coordinator of "PSR-13: Link definition interfaces",
+1 for Zend Framework
On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:15 PM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
wrote:
> Per the by-laws, the required review period has passed for the
> proposed standard PSR-13 (Link Definition Interfaces). No changes have
> been made in the past two weeks since re-opening the
've discovered often leads to insightful
back-and-forth. :)
I think Gary would be a good fit for FIG, and hope you find the same.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PH
Groups
> "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on t
I hereby nominate Graham Daniels for a position on the Core Committee.
Graham has excellent development skills, as evidenced by his activity in the
League of Extraordinary Packages, as well as his work at refinery29. He
speaks
often at conferences on development topics, but, also, and arguably mor
ed from its children. This is something you can do if you know
>>>> the children containers will always return the same instance but that you
>>>> cannot do if you don't know if the container will return the same or a new
>>>> instance. So reall
;>>> because of the personal relationship between Graham and Samantha, a current
>>>> Secretary. See further comment at
>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/php-fig/jFNMb6ykn1k/yLec0XvFCAAJ
>>>>
>>>> I think Graham can contribute a great deal, b
r (as in solution 2 or
> 3)?
Honestly, given that the "SHOULD" verbiage makes several people
uncomfortable, I'd opt for solution 1, dropping the sentences. We can
then potentially cover it in the meta document detailing the "why"
behind omitting any detail around the return
eveloper*,
which is why Expressive *provides a choice of containers*: to allow the
application developer to choose the container implementation that suits
their project. As long as that container is compatible with the PSR, it's
compatible with Expressive, plain and simple, because all we do i
ling what those potential
problems could be*. All I'm hearing is, "They're in a relationship!
Conflict of interest!" Nothing about what conflict is being predicted.
Do we have anything *demonstrable* as a potential conflict of
interest, or is it just a *feeling* that there'
On Nov 8, 2016 4:33 PM, "Larry Garfield" wrote:
>
> Since no one else seems to be doing so, I'll go ahead and do it. :-)
>
> I hereby nominate Matthew "MWOP" O'Phinney for the Core Committee. His
reputation, skill, and existing and ongoing contributions to FIG should
speak for themselves and requi
ramework/zend-expressive-router)
I'm certainly willing to discuss!
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP
Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscri
email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to php...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/b67406ac-5227-456d-a7c3-f65523bf527d%40googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https:/
for the digital sector in the Lancashire UK region.
I believe he brings an interesting mix of skills to the table, and would be a
fantastic voice for the committee!
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
You received this message because you are subscrib
elections.
This sounds reasonable to me; I was taken by surprise by how quickly
the secretary position was up for election again this past year, and
would definitely like to avoid that situation again.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
You received t
is always to:
- ensure internal consistency within the specification
- attempt some consistency with existing specifications
- consider implications for existing libraries and frameworks
- produce a specification that improves the ecosystem, rather than
directly mirrors it
If chosen to a CC role, these w
lum
>
>
> [1]: STV User-friendly Explanation
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8XOZJkozfI
>
> [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "PHP Framework Inte
-1 from Zend Framework
I'm missing a few details in the meta document and the spec for which I
cannot find discussions:
- I've seen a number of libraries allow a callback for the "default" value,
which allows deferring calculation of such a value until it's needed. Was
this ever considered? If so
//groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/99fd9037-331d-4645-ad0f-c911ae370356%40googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "PHP Framework Interoperability
tly, would likely be problematic in terms of performance, and
dictates too many details around implementation.
Please review the specification again at this time, and let us know as
soon as possible if you see any potential problems that remain to be
addressed.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phin
On Jan 6, 2017 5:00 AM, "'seva dolgopolov' via PHP Framework
Interoperability Group" wrote:
looks good, but they not implement "Psr\Http\Middleware\StackInterface",
Middleware stacking still has the same api as Middleware itself.
We do not implement it because StackInterface is no longer part o
wn
choice, but I don't think you can make a blanket declaration that it's worthless
when others have been actively building with it for quite some time now.
Finally, to each of those commenting JUST TODAY: I get it, we're all busy.
However, this is the SECOND review period we've
Most development for both psr-15 and psr-17 is happening in the
http-interop working group (https://github.com/http-interop). Woody is
currently wrapping up some final changes before bringing in the changes to
the php-fig repos and requesting a review period.
On Jan 15, 2017 4:16 AM, "Andrew Fletc
return $this->map[$id];
}
return $this->create($id);
}
Any NotFoundExceptionInterface raised now bubbles up, and I can see
what is missing and blocking execution. Alternately, my implementation
*could* still wrap in a try/catch block and provide a
MissingDep
ceptionInterface to bubble out.
> On Monday, January 16, 2017 at 6:48:24 PM UTC+3, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Larry Garfield
>> wrote:
>> > On 01/16/2017 04:58 AM, David Négrier wrote:
>> >
>> > Ok
specification again at this time, and let us know as soon as
possible if you see any remaining problems to address; ideally, please do so in
the next 48 hours, so that we may fit within the FIG 2.0 by-law window.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
the list:
```php
// Route: /article/:id
public function update($id, $request)
{
}
```
I personally have been pushing folks to follow the "1 route, 1
controller" paradigm, which is what your proposal suggests, but that's
a _suggestion_; _requiring_ it via a standard, however, means an
for
that currently to submit for acceptance at a date in the
not-too-distant future based on the concept of service providers
(https://github.com/container-interop/service-provider).
> On Tuesday, January 17, 2017 at 10:14:00 AM UTC-5, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
> wrote:
>>
>> We are
quorum, and
- Half or more of all votes cast must be in favor
in order for the vote to approve acceptance of PSR-11.
Voting starts now, and will run until 23:59 UTC on 13 February 2017.
On behalf of the PSR-11 team, thanks for your attention!
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmai
+1, from Zend Framework
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 9:35 AM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
wrote:
> After a couple months of review, and no additional tweaks during the
> last couple weeks, we are ready to initiate an acceptance vote for
> PSR-11.
>
> Please find the specification
+1
On Monday, February 6, 2017 at 10:54:18 AM UTC-6, Chris Tankersley wrote:
>
> It's been well past 2 weeks while having a discussion period on allowing
> Phergie as a member project, and here is the voting thread for Core
> Committee.
>
> Please vote with a -1/0/+1, like normal.
>
> Discussion
40 AM, Larry Garfield
> wrote:
>>
>> -1
>>
>> --Larry Garfield, Drupal
>>
>> On 01/31/2017 09:35 AM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
>>>
>>> After a couple months of review, and no additional tweaks during the
>>> last coupl
On Mar 6, 2017 12:51 AM, "Rasmus Schultz" wrote:
Why is this still listed on the homepage as being under review?
Because there's an issue with the Jekyll setup for the website, preventing
it from building correctly. My understanding is that work is being done to
migrate the site to sculpin, but
from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/9bfa790b-cbb2-4628-aa21-b82a8b8aa549%
Count me in!
On Mar 28, 2017 5:01 AM, "David Négrier" wrote:
> Hey list!
>
>
> PSR-11 has been accepted so we have standardized how to fetch entries from
> containers.
>
> The next logical step is to find a common way to put things into a
> container. More generally, the goal we are seeking is t
uest overhead would typically consist of a few calls to mostly-empty
> constructors, so we're most likely talking microseconds (if any measurable)
> difference.
>
> I know you will intuitively want to look for reasons to dismiss this idea,
> but all of this has to make you
2017, or all members
of the CC have voted, whichever comes first.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP
Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from
+1 from me, as is probably expected.
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
wrote:
> As the two week discussion period regarding the PSR-15 working group
> is now over, I am calling an entrance vote for the PSR-15 working
> group, with the current membership:
>
: myself
- Members: Stefano Torresi, Matthieu Napoli, Korvin Szanto, Glenn
Eggleton, Oscar Otero
If there are no objections after 2 weeks, I will open an entrance vote
for the working group.
Thanks!
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
You received this me
Okay, jumped the gun on the send button!
Two more things:
- We also include Tobias Nyholm under the WG members.
- Voting will commence no earlier than 11:59 on 23 May 2017.
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
wrote:
> I hereby open a 2 week discussion period around
, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
wrote:
> As the two week discussion period regarding the PSR-15 working group
> is now over, I am calling an entrance vote for the PSR-15 working
> group, with the current membership:
>
> - Editor: Woody Gilk
> - Sponsor: myself
> - Members: Stefan
conflict might occur. Otherwise, it seems more like you
have problems with existing or proposed names, to which I will only
note that no name chosen for any specification will completely satisfy
everyone. (Naming being one of the chief problems in computer science
and whatnot.)
--
Matthew Weier O&#
familiar with generators, the example is
extremely opaque and difficult to comprehend.
Also, as noted, it makes alternate delegation strategies impossible,
as it essentially dictates one and only one way to implement a
middleware stack. Having the freedom to implement the delegate any way
you wish so
implementations of
the interfaces, one targeting each version. These could be released as
separate minor versions of the associated library (e.g., 1.0 would
have the PHP 5 interfaces, 1.1 would have the PHP 7 interfaces).
Consumers and/or implementors would then choose which version they
support.
Th
> email to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/bc288330-b520-4248-b8fb-588e6fd5de09%40googlegroups.com.
> For more options, vis
the upcoming election!
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP
Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it
ups
> "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web vis
nd stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/09e35685-1488-45f7-96ee-14b5265cdfd1%40goo
At this time, I'm opening a vote to enter the REVIEW period for
PSR-15. This vote is open only to PSR-15 Working Group members, which
include:
- Woody Gilk (Editor)
- Matthew Weier O'Phinney (Sponsor)
- Stefano Torresi
- Matthieu Napoli
- Korvin Szanto
- Glenn Eggleton
- Oscar Otero
T
Clearly, +1 from myself.
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:39 AM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
wrote:
> At this time, I'm opening a vote to enter the REVIEW period for
> PSR-15. This vote is open only to PSR-15 Working Group members, which
> include:
>
> - Woody Gilk (Editor)
&g
at 10:39 AM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
wrote:
> At this time, I'm opening a vote to enter the REVIEW period for
> PSR-15. This vote is open only to PSR-15 Working Group members, which
> include:
>
> - Woody Gilk (Editor)
> - Matthew Weier O'Phinney (Sponsor)
&
phase.
The review period will end no sooner than 1 January 2017 at 11:59pm.
At that time, if the working group can demonstrate two viable trial
implementations, and no need for major changes, I will call for an
Acceptance Vote.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwo
Dec 5, 2017, at 12:49 PM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
>> wrote:
>>
>> As of today, we formally begin the REVIEW phase of the proposed PSR-15
>> (HTTP Server Request Handlers) specification. The proposed
>> specification is in the fig-standards repository at the
ng against it.
Defining both interfaces in a single specification but shipping them
as separate packages is a quite reasonable compromise.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Goog
Thanks for the thorough review, Larry!
Comments inline.
On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Larry Garfield wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 5, 2017 11:49:43 AM CST Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
>> As of today, we formally begin the REVIEW phase of the proposed PSR-15
>> (HTTP Ser
one
another?
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP
Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails fro
around for another term.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP
Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it
larly as several in the working
group have successfully developed exception-handling middleware that
was capable of working with any exception/throwable.
Thanks for your feedback, Benni Mack!
>> On 9. Jan 2018, at 21:22, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
>> wrote:
>>
&g
oglegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/180d3e53-7a10-4566-976b-25900f38f14a%40googlegroups.com.
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/opto
implementations. We can provide
additional links on request.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP
Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this
+1 from Matthew Weier O'Phinney
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 9:47 AM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
wrote:
> The REVIEW period for the proposed PSR-15, HTTP Server Request
> Handlers, hit its minimum required length on 2 January 2018. We
> continued the period since then to
this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/efa147fc-ff7c-4537-9e43-3bb4cf3c5249%40googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinne
s provided any feedback or ideas!
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweierophin...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP
Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receivin
1 - 100 of 211 matches
Mail list logo
