On 6 Jul 2014, at 17:46, Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk> wrote:
> On 06/07/14 16:08, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>> I think it’s generally clear what’s for the new PHP 6 and what’s for the old;
>> anything from after the old PHP 6 was abandoned must be about a new PHP 6, and anything from before
>> it must be about the old PHP 6. If this RFC were to pass with people voting for 6, then it would be
>> pretty clear that anything coming after it was about the new PHP 6.
>
> https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=php6+site%3Abugs.php.net
> ...
>
> Now one can filter additional on date, but the point here is that just
> starting with the bugs list we have conflicting material that needs to
> be avoided. PHP6 WAS documented extensively even just on the web site, a
> lot of that material gets mirrored with more recent timestamps which
> makes filtering what is new and what is old a lot more difficult. Even
> PHP7 appears quite often on the website, but fortunately not too often
> in the bugs list …
Can’t we just rename the PHP 6 category to “Old PHP 6” on bugs.php.net and be done with it? Or
does it not work like that?
--
Andrea Faulds
http://ajf.me/