On 07/27/2017 07:35 AM, Oscar Otero wrote: > Having one namespace for each Psr, makes more easy to create new > standards and avoid conflicts. This is specially interesting for the > FIG, where new standards appear without an initial plan to structure > and sort all these things. I guess this is why PSR are numbered > incrementally (PSR-0, PSR-1, PSR-2, …) > If a new psr replaces other, it must use the same namespace. For > example, a future PSR-34 can deprecate a PSR-7, so it use the same > namespace (Psr\Http\Message). > > This is my suggestion. There’re other guys who are disagree with this, > so I like to share this in order to read other opinions. > > Thank you! > Oscar Otero.
Background: This was part of the reason behind Anthony Ferrara's proposal that we switch to numbering PSR namespaces rather than naming them. So \Psr\Psr15 (or whatever) removes all ambiguity entirely, except for having to look up which PSR 15 was. :-) Also, just to make clear, the PHP runtime doesn't give a crap about the namespaces we choose. This is entirely a human-consumption question. (Which totally is important, sure, I'm just making it clear in case anyone was confused.) --Larry Garfield -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/160956cd-ceb6-9053-ed00-ec6dbf59e10e%40garfieldtech.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
