Re: phpng, migration guide draft

On Mon, 2014-05-12 at 14:33 -0700, Stas Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > > I disagree. These changes are perfectly valid as rfc and should be > > proposed as any other changes. > > > > By this principle, everything in PHP introduced since we have the wiki > should live under rfc namespace, since it was a change which has to be > proposed as an RFC. I think such usage of rfc namespace makes it useless > as it would mix pages pertaining to the rfc process as such (proposing > the change, discussing it, etc.) with pages used to document various things. Just to rephrase in a way we all understand and agree (hopefully): * If this change is added it requires an RFC, under rfc/ * Now is too early for an RFC on such a complex topic * The whole set of documentation is too much for an RFC * This basic documentation should be in a namespace (phpng/ or maybe internals/phpng/) * The RFC can quote and link that documentation once it is being proposed * Lateron this should end up in the PHP docs johannes