> I'm not actually sure what it is opinionated about. If it's in regards to
> the
> "maybe JIT someday" aspects then that is clearly an open-ended comment,
> but mostly there to say "this is not actually a JIT" which did need to be
> said.
Like Ferenc said, there's a tone in that message that is not subjective.
I'm not even sure what it is, but it looks (or reads) awkward, and is unlike
anything I can remember in the last 17+ years on www.php.net.
> If the choices are between writing blog posts to let the community know
> whats going on now and then, and rushing phpng because phpclasses.org
> spammed out another awful article, then I would pick keeping a blog going.
I have no problem with blogging about it (on the contrary). www.php.net
isn't a blog, though, it's the official news outlet of the PHP project and
typically deals only with concrete versions. We never discuss anything
internals@ related there, and the soonest we ever mention a PHP version on
there is when it reaches alpha.
I'm also not saying phpng should be 'rushed', although I would definitely be
happy if it sped up a bit. To put things in perspective, I think that if we
all work efficiently and everything aligns, mid 2015 is the soonest we might
see a phpng-based version coming out. In order for that to happen, though,
we need to start moving things along.
> blog.php.net would be awesome. If we can get that going then this article
> can be moved over there once its up, and people will see who wrote it and
> all
> of that good stuff. Please though, leave this where it is until then or
> the
> group looks indecisive as hell.
I don't think this article should have been published on www.php.net in the
first place, and I don't think it should stay there just because it happens
to already be there.
Zeev