FAQ
Hi guys,

While checking a RFC page I noticed the Status was showing "Under
discussion" while the RFC list (https://wiki.php.net/rfc) was showing it
was Implemented.

Then I checked several other RFC's and quite a lot of them have mismatching
information. I compiled a list so somebody with access could revisit and
fix them.


5.3

Accepted:
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/namespaceresolution
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/namespaceseparator
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/heredoc-with-double-quotes (says Accepted but
also Implemented)
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/lsb_parentself_forwarding
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/e-user-deprecated-warning

Under discussion:
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/fpm
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/fpm/ini_syntax
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/newinis


5.4

Accepted:
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/functionarraydereferencing

Voting:
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/error-formatting-for-developers

"Committed":
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/horizontalreuse
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/closures/object-extension
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortags

Under discussion:
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/removal-of-deprecated-features
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/runtimecache
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/zendsignals
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/callable

"Dead as no one seem to be interested in" (my favorite status):
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/allow_multiple_simultaneous_syslog_connections

"Old hat":
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/new-output-api


5.5

Accepted:
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/optimizerplus

"Commited":
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/constdereference

Under discussion:
- https://wiki.php.net/rfc/curl-file-upload


Thanks!

--
Renan Gonçalves aka renan.saddam
Software Engineer at TrueServer B.V.
CakePHP Core Developer

W: renangoncalves.com
T: twitter.com/renan_saddam
M: +31 (0)6 4662 1860
L: Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Search Discussions

  • Christopher Jones at Oct 28, 2013 at 10:25 pm

    On 10/28/2013 09:51 AM, Renan Gonçalves wrote:
    Hi guys,

    While checking a RFC page I noticed the Status was showing "Under
    discussion" while the RFC list (https://wiki.php.net/rfc) was showing it
    was Implemented.

    Then I checked several other RFC's and quite a lot of them have mismatching
    information. I compiled a list so somebody with access could revisit and
    fix them.
    While you're looking at them, it would help if you could mail what change needs
    to be made to each one.

    Chris
  • Renan Gonçalves at Oct 29, 2013 at 9:56 am

    On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:25 PM, Christopher Jones wrote:

    While you're looking at them, it would help if you could mail what change
    needs to be made to each one.

    Each one should have the right Status, which according to the RFC list page
    is Implemented.
    Sorry if I wasn't clear on my initial post.


    --
    Renan Gonçalves aka renan.saddam
    Software Engineer at TrueServer B.V.
    CakePHP Core Developer

    W: renangoncalves.com
    T: twitter.com/renan_saddam
    M: +31 (0)6 4662 1860
    L: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • Christopher Jones at Oct 29, 2013 at 3:42 pm

    On 10/29/13 2:56 AM, Renan Gonçalves wrote:
    On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:25 PM, Christopher Jones <
    christopher.jones@oracle.com> wrote:
    While you're looking at them, it would help if you could mail what change
    needs to be made to each one.

    Each one should have the right Status, which according to the RFC list page
    is Implemented.
    Sorry if I wasn't clear on my initial post.
    Can you list the RFC and the statuses they should have? Otherwise,
    someone has to duplicate all the research you've already done. If you
    don't list them, I expect no one will spend time to update the RFCs.
    If you do create the list, then someone like myself might update them.

    Chris
  • Nikita Popov at Oct 29, 2013 at 5:42 pm

    On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 5:51 PM, Renan Gonçalves wrote:

    Hi guys,

    While checking a RFC page I noticed the Status was showing "Under
    discussion" while the RFC list (https://wiki.php.net/rfc) was showing it
    was Implemented.

    Then I checked several other RFC's and quite a lot of them have mismatching
    information. I compiled a list so somebody with access could revisit and
    fix them.
    Thanks, I updated all statuses of the listed RFCs to "Implemented in PHP
    5.x". Only one I didn't change is
    https://wiki.php.net/rfc/allow_multiple_simultaneous_syslog_connections,
    because I have no idea whether that actually landed or not.

    Nikita
  • Andrea Faulds at Oct 29, 2013 at 6:36 pm

    On 29/10/13 17:42, Nikita Popov wrote:
    Thanks, I updated all statuses of the listed RFCs to "Implemented in PHP
    5.x". Only one I didn't change is
    https://wiki.php.net/rfc/allow_multiple_simultaneous_syslog_connections,
    because I have no idea whether that actually landed or not.
    Hello,

    As a related note, the "How To Create an RFC" page
    (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/howto) states this:
    8. When your feature is implemented in PHP, update the RFC with:
    i. the version(s) it was merged to
    ii. a link to the git commit(s)
    iii. a link to the PHP manual entry for the feature
    Some of your own RFCs don't have this, nor do others. I think this
    should also be addressed.

    Thanks.

    --
    Andrea Faulds
    http://ajf.me/
  • Christopher Jones at Oct 29, 2013 at 6:53 pm

    On 10/29/2013 11:36 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
    On 29/10/13 17:42, Nikita Popov wrote:

    Thanks, I updated all statuses of the listed RFCs to "Implemented in PHP
    5.x". Only one I didn't change is
    https://wiki.php.net/rfc/allow_multiple_simultaneous_syslog_connections,
    because I have no idea whether that actually landed or not.
    Hello,

    As a related note, the "How To Create an RFC" page (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/howto) states this:
    8. When your feature is implemented in PHP, update the RFC with:
    i. the version(s) it was merged to
    ii. a link to the git commit(s)
    iii. a link to the PHP manual entry for the feature
    Some of your own RFCs don't have this, nor do others. I think this should also be addressed.

    Thanks.
    The creation steps were not in their current form until after a number
    of RFCs were created. Not all RFCs will contain the information that
    they mention. I don't think there is a huge value in retro updating
    old RFCs - but feel free to do it.

    If the PHP Manual doesn't have useful information about the feature
    (description and implementation version), then log a bug or fix the
    manual directly.

    Chris
  • Andrea Faulds at Oct 29, 2013 at 6:54 pm

    On 29/10/13 18:52, Christopher Jones wrote:
    The creation steps were not in their current form until after a number
    of RFCs were created. Not all RFCs will contain the information that
    they mention. I don't think there is a huge value in retro updating
    old RFCs - but feel free to do it.
    Ah, I see. I was unaware of that, and I agree.

    --
    Andrea Faulds
    http://ajf.me/
  • Christopher Jones at Oct 29, 2013 at 7:04 pm

    On 10/29/2013 11:54 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
    On 29/10/13 18:52, Christopher Jones wrote:

    The creation steps were not in their current form until after a number
    of RFCs were created. Not all RFCs will contain the information that
    they mention. I don't think there is a huge value in retro updating
    old RFCs - but feel free to do it.
    Ah, I see. I was unaware of that, and I agree.
    If you find any RFC created after June 2013 that is lacking, prod the authors.

    Chris

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupphp-internals @
categoriesphp
postedOct 28, '13 at 4:52p
activeOct 29, '13 at 7:04p
posts9
users4
websitephp.net

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase