Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:107104 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 37216 invoked from network); 15 Sep 2019 15:21:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp3.php.net) (208.43.231.12) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 15 Sep 2019 15:21:00 -0000 Received: from php-smtp3.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp3.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E77992CE1E5 for ; Sun, 15 Sep 2019 05:57:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp3.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_HELO_NONE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS29169 217.70.176.0/20 X-Spam-Virus: No Received: from relay5-d.mail.gandi.net (relay5-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.197]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp3.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Sun, 15 Sep 2019 05:57:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: 107.223.28.39 Received: from [192.168.1.85] (107-223-28-39.lightspeed.nsvltn.sbcglobal.net [107.223.28.39]) (Authenticated sender: pmjones@pmjones.io) by relay5-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ECFC51C0008; Sun, 15 Sep 2019 12:57:35 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 07:57:33 -0500 Cc: PHP internals , rasmus@php.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <2EC3BC5F-CE24-4CB1-868E-419919C15D7D@pmjones.io> References: To: Joe Watkins X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-Envelope-From: Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Defining the PHP Group From: pmjones@pmjones.io ("Paul M. Jones") Hi all, > Does anyone object to any of those words ? This strikes me as yet another attempt at a power grab, so many of the = words are objectionable. However, this phrase will serve to show the = weakness of the proposal: > Anyone may initiate an RFC for any subject. There needs to be an articulable limiting principle; without it, there = can be no strong continuity, only the current passion of a mob. For = example, this phrasing means the RFC system itself can be put up to = vote, to be removed and replaced with something entirely non-democratic. Some things simply have to be off limits. What are those things? --=20 Paul M. Jones pmjones@pmjones.io http://paul-m-jones.com Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP https://leanpub.com/mlaphp Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP https://leanpub.com/sn1php