Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:111333 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 37227 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2020 02:55:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 5 Aug 2020 02:55:55 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F2501804C2 for ; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 18:53:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from premium76-2.web-hosting.com (premium76-2.web-hosting.com [162.213.253.84]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 18:53:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pmjones.io; s=default; h=References:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:Date:Subject:Mime-Version: Content-Type:Message-Id:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=2kQ766t47i9Tl/s0ckGOxjuLrMKOwvuyBkFIO2VIpw8=; b=aKIumqDF+aJjTPWBNKsuQz+gsc boOHc17vNbGRV5Nqk47hwi93u7b45iZwfkemsBRbDWdW98hfAteFjHYwYnP4bCC/yMX03Wk8ehGVF N0Byb4Vde1bAXjCs5dMBVARHs5mahzbetGNtOpUYkWfPQU7yCugl3sKmEIEZ4Y1piUm6jclf/cDZl uBHvAi5iFS+b3Ey4F6jyAqmZV9aoAYxHCqeVsN9C2CvBITRLRcsjQe6xK5rNrTU/AIDTFi+sLInwo //8rWk5nXSPV0P+KVFZQrZJwxDVAB+3H9Ti3u1Jat2yIYQieY1UFkeGAD6YKHmIV9LCm48T3IWnEz JBF53eYQ==; Received: from 107-223-28-39.lightspeed.nsvltn.sbcglobal.net ([107.223.28.39]:55325 helo=samurai.attlocal.net) by premium76.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1k38cZ-003Ge9-10; Tue, 04 Aug 2020 21:53:39 -0400 Message-ID: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_3884ACB7-0E3B-4604-AC45-1CC1F663A0DF" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\)) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 20:53:33 -0500 In-Reply-To: Cc: Derick Rethans , PHP Developers Mailing List To: =?utf-8?Q?Pedro_Magalh=C3=A3es?= References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2) X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - premium76.web-hosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.php.net X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - pmjones.io X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: premium76.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: pmjones@pmjones.io X-Authenticated-Sender: premium76.web-hosting.com: pmjones@pmjones.io X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Shorter Attribute Syntax Change RFC 0.2 From: pmjones@pmjones.io ("Paul M. Jones") --Apple-Mail=_3884ACB7-0E3B-4604-AC45-1CC1F663A0DF Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Hi all, > On Aug 4, 2020, at 17:07, Pedro Magalh=C3=A3es = wrote: >=20 > I'd like to reinforce the idea that this RFC (as all RFCs) needs a = Yes/No > primary vote which should attain a 2/3 majority to pass. As it was the = case > with https://wiki.php.net/rfc/shorter_attribute_syntax, it had a = primary > vote asking "Are you okay with re-voting on the attribute syntax for = PHP > 8.0?" and that vote passed with 50 to 8. >=20 > The primary vote on this RFC could be the exact same question, but I > believe the primary vote needs to be there. Without this primary vote, = we > could be enacting a change that only (with 4 options) 25%+1 voters = support, > which is clearly insufficient. However, if 2/3 of the voters agree = that > something needs to change, they are also accepting that the change may = not > be the one they prefer. Hear, hear. If this RFC *must* go to a vote (and that is not a given), = then adding a primary vote along the lines of "Are you okay with = re-voting on the attribute syntax for PHP 8.0?" would go a long way = toward alleviating the "vote until the voters get it 'right'" problem. --=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 --Apple-Mail=_3884ACB7-0E3B-4604-AC45-1CC1F663A0DF--