Re: phpng, migration guide draft
On Mon, 2014-05-12 at 14:33 -0700, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > I disagree. These changes are perfectly valid as rfc and should be
> > proposed as any other changes.
> >
>
> By this principle, everything in PHP introduced since we have the wiki
> should live under rfc namespace, since it was a change which has to be
> proposed as an RFC. I think such usage of rfc namespace makes it useless
> as it would mix pages pertaining to the rfc process as such (proposing
> the change, discussing it, etc.) with pages used to document various things.
Just to rephrase in a way we all understand and agree (hopefully):
* If this change is added it requires an RFC, under rfc/
* Now is too early for an RFC on such a complex topic
* The whole set of documentation is too much for an RFC
* This basic documentation should be in a namespace (phpng/ or
maybe internals/phpng/)
* The RFC can quote and link that documentation once it is being
proposed
* Lateron this should end up in the PHP docs
johannes
Thread (7 messages)