Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:105507 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 82742 invoked from network); 29 Apr 2019 17:17:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-pg1-f178.google.com) (209.85.215.178) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 29 Apr 2019 17:17:10 -0000 Received: by mail-pg1-f178.google.com with SMTP id n2so5207559pgg.13 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 07:19:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=basereality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=m6A6jSA1iStlH0UrwnTlHwc7viDw/VPIdyHHhot+mmA=; b=Z2OxhpH5cn8gZ0WaTGXbhC7g17HWwFx267n+PcbSMIMgWpsu7oW0/b+mmXY5dVq4CU UMtwS0aGUkS8CYPYoz81WBf3bLbQfqP8jFt2FdMcDv3u2bArmRSr0FiaTgOTHRyBnTiq Ynt6p3Ria8cZn0VDTa0sNe/JbkFb9Cx0YCnP1S9Kx0bNpO4H9hESJHBKvnppK6N9WkDI UIvQi3fRx0/3dTHFjmuwkXeWl5A9uohq2w986fLPH6cPvdbAPfkzJU0qapoprI6kYHXf edQGa4jkO7gFzUWuvqPbgtxrVDv45HvUEytr32RQGkg1R0/pFikfHIWqDybIMUjd81JC QlpQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=m6A6jSA1iStlH0UrwnTlHwc7viDw/VPIdyHHhot+mmA=; b=I7R3jvOBEUZeh6SckYzZo/5RD8Yx1khZVQUojfa+Urikdy5WyBpzYAleoZbbKlsu/T b4cKaXW6yUv05lQ/LFBeXunKkru+RoGlfnfN35liAlaj9HClJtumH2mevxwOaU1+lUj6 vwfEjC3qstVyBTobwBwl6aCqkj/+/4QO3ahVN/oxfSvhYb1JMNNZSWl21fDVXTTP0YDy YU4AdmKIRwDx5AfOKxk3thlFOncy4e7+Phqq+POvnIkE0cjt/RDbVdUdX/3C8F4GedpN fWn6bV+d6pG0pMkS4eRMnonCEL8EaHxVN4rRn37+DJ/QnehDduNZI9ehnboX2eVZoBSP Ly5g== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWzC5Gq5FHRjhplL4mo3elBSHGKDapvCkAZAu48a2/qnWY6KRng KzWd1VofBpHsHIltly708rji7AKw+153ETOcVlNkaHetxR8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxK3IEnit4dLL1bHmQUaCFN7zqIeWLRTnOVHPCV0VsHhOHwzKcZQKw8YRg5J/5a87QicIhEndsSknmc1Xvf26Q= X-Received: by 2002:a63:fd0c:: with SMTP id d12mr36101957pgh.172.1556547544464; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 07:19:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <0ec42fa9-77d1-a203-8425-e72fdd5071f3@korulczyk.pl> <06473788-a34b-f041-36e6-31d19d8dda4c@cubiclesoft.com> <59cafbfb-2bb0-468c-458f-74bcac780e0f@korulczyk.pl> <004c01d4f09f$880ac320$98204960$@roze.lv> <004401d4faa3$60f83700$22e8a500$@gmail.com> <2f922f17-bc7c-313a-8f77-122e861995be@lsces.co.uk> <5741936F-B1F4-43C7-B815-F9D8030AC7BB@koalephant.com> <49A4B76C-4C62-4CBE-BA20-FBE56CA29AB0@cschneid.com> <609E93CF-099B-446C-AD28-04F1D802C9F0@cschneid.com> <000401d4fac8$ae592cf0$0b0b86d0$@roze.lv> In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 15:18:53 +0100 Message-ID: To: Zeev Suraski Cc: PHP Internals List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [VOTE] Deprecate PHP's short open tags From: Danack@basereality.com (Dan Ackroyd) On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 13:29, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > If we go in this direction, though, then unless George agrees to withdraw >this RFC Zeev, I do not think you behaviour is appropriate. It's not appropriate to put pressure on an RFC author to withdraw an RFC after it has been voted on. It's not appropriate to try to change the rules on voting after a vote has occurred. Please stop doing this. > We're in unchartered territory not from a process perspective, but in terms > of the number of core devs I don't believe that is true* (there appear to be core devs on both sides of the vote) but even if it was, this is not an internal engine matter, where the decision is going to cause a significant amount of work for people who work on PHP core. I strongly doubt this type of RFC is ever going to be reserved for core developers choice only. For the record I think the result of the vote is dumb, and I hope that the situation will be resolved before the 7.4 release. And I also agree that we should have clearer rules about who qualifies for a vote. But trying to subvert a vote after it has happened is not appropriate imo. Nikita Popov has already started a new thread in an attempt to make the situation be more acceptable. That is the correct way of resolving problems like this. Putting pressure on people to bend the rules is not. cheers Dan Ack * If you'd described it as release managers were all voting on one side, then it would be true.