Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:106403
Return-Path: <narf@devilix.net>
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 47524 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2019 10:01:21 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mail-wm1-f54.google.com) (209.85.128.54)
  by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 7 Aug 2019 10:01:21 -0000
Received: by mail-wm1-f54.google.com with SMTP id f17so78866587wme.2
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Wed, 07 Aug 2019 00:28:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=devilix.net; s=google;
        h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to
         :cc;
        bh=msDRAT/qeqcxG4AGIs+wPjrDOOLFUKPXMbFvW9p5yKM=;
        b=pCh0onSA9WvuW5muSqcixRJGeymDS9hf5AoxV5A+sX4t1aUIE2TV7XsFS65fD7PCzo
         yHaarJueMk3mM0EUV57Hz6qtPsyVxoiqPUTwypDTpDoqt7QvGI9FNKmdbn2XDA2XwdtF
         TcPHU5RQVgHyKyxT2t9OoWhbFdzTsc8TPCe+k=
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=msDRAT/qeqcxG4AGIs+wPjrDOOLFUKPXMbFvW9p5yKM=;
        b=nDIk255r2GZWcIQ7rbQQ7dGiNQA9Al0AzGHqIT0gU0NQ42vYqoPBp9ejsu1efFleWG
         WGAIFmHylwiwWQl+4Qgv74Ncaep1ZQAU7vjJEr3Ma3XedEAHYPKbeelg+jmTwj8ztTVW
         JcYRkFO6LrK5T79Li494F7YBYl+7gzule0WyMv7EnMeh7jj3DMK6k40GqkMBaLCSc+vN
         ChB7k/KwbSGVS6/w+QSBD+4+KKlXYVwT8VdjdPO+8QG8V6pfBDjeH2Tyserp3OFellgQ
         whscbjZDVmZZzmZlFh+F1lGLZZSu/UVYtpbOaqCLdWVHd8K65wUht/J4IinPYBnxNxDS
         btkQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUxh518GQgSNhm82si+Xxdmf16cou7ivLOwG2b6A/NbmCw1YB5R
	74hceBdxTYj0PKyOSElRAhQ0O7FBJT3nV2rtewe4KQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwLGqYNrTZtRn3Kl9I3RgFo3FNRh/ckhugT/f7M7QUJcgH4HhMzZoeM2a4VrSwUdp8lEGX92KmLhUkJhIEYAn8=
X-Received: by 2002:a1c:ab06:: with SMTP id u6mr8868310wme.125.1565162891655;
 Wed, 07 Aug 2019 00:28:11 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAFPFaML19B_RehrUQLEy_oFae-H5r3+BpUGg=GF1js83cJpJqQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPKYkKxHkQojFnCs09htRFvTrV_SReQV7YVo6RxRSmuN9H_Q0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALKiJKrXatW9Va0bjsUQD+TCCge=HcMzyV8Uf+rq+_s9xoyyuQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAFPFaMJKq7rqY0ZSPuimWVTY8ZZc=jXJS3__fNRnvBfp+W3PXg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFPFaMJKq7rqY0ZSPuimWVTY8ZZc=jXJS3__fNRnvBfp+W3PXg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 10:28:00 +0300
Message-ID: <CAPhkiZy-5Z0CLMUCZ_0OKaUrONrbVfZztfvRcOMUvjEFRp9Xqg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "G. P. B." <george.banyard@gmail.com>
Cc: Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com>, Chase Peeler <chasepeeler@gmail.com>, 
	PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [VOTE] Deprecate PHP's short open tags, again
From: narf@devilix.net (Andrey Andreev)

Hi,

On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 8:20 PM G. P. B. <george.banyard@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This RFC supersedes the previous one as stated in the the RFC itself : "
> This RFC supersedes the previous one and proposes a different deprecation
> approach." meaning that the previous one is void.
> I don't know why this is ambiguous and needs to be said once again.
>

As far as I know, there's been no vote to cancel the previously
accepted RFC, so ... even though I didn't like the outcome of it, I
don't understand how it is just made void now. It's pretty easy to
understand the ambiguity.

I won't be voting on this one due to all of this.

Cheers,
Andrey.