On 20 Jul 2014, at 16:43, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:
>
> On 20 Jul 2014, at 16:39, Peter Cowburn <petercowburn@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It might be just me, but the whole RFC actually seems particularly
>> one-sided. The argument for PHP 6 is very short and reads half-baked. The
>> overwhelming majority of this very short section of the RFC is spent
>> describing how naming the release “PHP 6” will be a problem, with a very
>> wishy-washy conclusion that the author “expects” and “thinks” it won’t end
>> up being a problem. The PHP 6 section makes no attempt to provide counter
>> points to things mentioned in the following section, nor really attempts to
>> make *any* strong point at all.
>
> I swear the PHP 6 section was much longer before. Did Zeev delete some of it?
Zeev must have as the only person who edited it since was him.
I’ve restored the Rationale section from before to “The Case for PHP 6”.
--
Andrea Faulds
http://ajf.me/