Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:107334
Return-Path: <rowan.collins@gmail.com>
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 30702 invoked from network); 26 Sep 2019 14:40:54 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp3.php.net) (208.43.231.12)
by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 26 Sep 2019 14:40:54 -0000
Received: from php-smtp3.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by php-smtp3.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E53B02C0534
for <internals@lists.php.net>; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 05:20:17 -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=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
SPF_HELO_NONE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16
X-Spam-Virus: No
Received: from mail-io1-xd2f.google.com (mail-io1-xd2f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2f])
(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 <internals@lists.php.net>; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 05:20:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd2f.google.com with SMTP id u8so5941008iom.5
for <internals@lists.php.net>; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 05:20:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
bh=ZOWM9wI1XoYjPrL/Fv21Zp3B8SpQyZyHdV04XlqZ0RQ=;
b=S5KOR+97vXmW2OX009kAngFiA3//2O5Q+Hnqj/QCdHzeJV8s1d5n6zFVzNPzOBkC2F
NRvXDs6xds3bRhtwOLI0S5Dn2TyH18cB+JRmqOJUWerqYcFohcuRPgrji4nwFVPNeGr6
EjjAlhATj/Q2VDDtieMYjbrZDqDfQglE2x1ENsopli5XoFKy+hVp5k08JGSPQX/RCRrQ
YvIQiWR7EVEMdkLkM+QFjkaPatNKE8Fn0EjYiNyGEdBbGwvaLvoLvwpjwdEYsEA8Fpp0
23vu884ulIs3xGTwhUlUlEd1lKXBTYAR0vSol6uXdqGFSIA9fRk8Rj/sDng8Mm/+wjqV
7i6g==
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;
bh=ZOWM9wI1XoYjPrL/Fv21Zp3B8SpQyZyHdV04XlqZ0RQ=;
b=MtaUh6K2rIrmFiUcFL9lj1iyBuQtfhpOPzLFY1L4J6i3WeYokf/FDibdvKOD8BPq+z
S8SYweAy2ZupCYrUT61bfVhPaMqib9TMxuV+3HtMZLFFIVxHXQbUohlsDE2VW6Kd05B+
0tili9WuHFzVfpx00QWBoWNzHXgH+Wf6Fdj0bGSYz0qknwzyuJdmWUcBDojSeLdnA8YA
RhvCEyYGZoYz/pYYBqW1OCakbuq4BNLXBLy1O4bHJyQcl4Wd3I9fTA+nPGHd5PG1GsgX
WXxLrJRB9bZ/tQvYFOoehZn1MZQsNjwGAlNryxJBW1PLdRsTQ0ZUvhIGr5koiu8ceXK7
O2YA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXUwyF9xyg3Rayqs4wwOnBzaa38GzFiLbjAlUgLgo+tScqJ4OD7
2zx1FRSHhKI7XMq+rruAw3N1wNHf6LxK5hzu14gCKA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxBuvv2y3RhzUnzEKdYZo6uwhZgr8sMjvWWGpyXVAQ07EKoGlOOKFR3GevSBBrQgmCCxJDTObHRDeKghKlmjfY=
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:3806:: with SMTP id f6mr3007696ioa.120.1569500416387;
Thu, 26 Sep 2019 05:20:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAF+90c_Ds+UNZB4hAi1989SRafb=d1JkP2q4pdwkUUXfcHrLCw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAF+90c99w6Uk+P8rm_p0Pd3iKsBKQqAbBjs2Zzwb5vGW9-snhQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAPg3XxJGQTXGgUGkEJ9LjtBk-kzDRviQsu-oJT5kYgbprBaV7g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPg3XxJGQTXGgUGkEJ9LjtBk-kzDRviQsu-oJT5kYgbprBaV7g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2019 13:20:05 +0100
Message-ID: <CALKiJKo51E2aiay+y73y7psjrdtiC-3-qTTnchgckGGqXAvY=g@mail.gmail.com>
To: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000cb3202059373ca15"
X-Envelope-From: <rowan.collins@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [VOTE] Reclassifying engine warnings
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Tommins)
--000000000000cb3202059373ca15
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 at 10:48, Peter Cowburn <petercowburn@gmail.com> wrote:
> I just want to go on the record in saying that I am very, very disappointed
> that a choice that only got 28% of the overall votes, and only 33% of votes
> in the "we want change" scenario, is being taken as the will of the
> overwhelming majority, which is the bar that is needed to be crossed for
> RFC votes. This is wholly irresponsible.
>
Three-way votes are always tricky in this respect, but I think in this case
Nikita has taken a very sensible approach.
Firstly, the interpretation of the three-way vote was laid out very clearly
on the page, and I'm not aware of anyone objecting to it prior to this
point.
Secondly, it makes sense intuitively: it seems unlikely that someone who
would vote yes to the question "Should undefined variables give an Error
instead of a Notice?" would vote no to the question "Should undefined
variables give a Warning instead of a Notice?"
Thirdly, the options are not mutually exclusive in the way that, say, a
syntax decision would be. Raising the level to Warning now doesn't prevent
a future proposal to raise it to Error (e.g. on a different timescale).
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, RFC votes are intended to be
measures of consensus. Taken alongside the discussion, the result strongly
suggests that there is a consensus (but not a unanimous one) to change the
error level, but there is some concern about raising it as high as Error.
Regards,
--
Rowan Tommins
[IMSoP]
--000000000000cb3202059373ca15--