Re: We Want Quality

> Well then, don't be surprised if what you say ends up sounding very > different than what you meant, if you omit 'needless' words. The words > you probably refer to as needless are the words that usually set the > atmosphere of your statements, and even though they may not affect what > you're actually saying, they make all the difference in the world. Following up: A discussion of communication models, perception and intention. Well, sure. If you want to read these rules as being oppressive and inpolite, you can do so, because they are context free. Many words do not transfer any information. In easily memorizable rules, such words are omitted. > > Extending the release process to reach a larger audience will > > help. Reviving the php-beta list where people commit to test > > basic functionality on their platform is a good start. > > Yes, that would be a good idea. php-beta@ was simply never quite a > success story, I think it had about 15 people at its peak. We can try to > advertise it more though. Agreed. > > I don't see it that way. The contributors are interested in > > improving PHP, not in destabilizing it. Closing the CVS tree > > for a week will not stop them from developing new stuff. It > > will only delay inclusion to the official PHP CVS tree. > > Considering branches don't work too nicely with CVS, halting development > for long periods of time (1-2 weeks) would, de-facto, hurt the development > of PHP. We should definitely implement a feature freeze, but a code > freeze is simply not possible IMO. You are assuming Developing equals being able to commit. While it makes collaborating with other people harder (assuming they have no tools like email, diff, patch), I think it is an acceptable trade-off. - Sascha