Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:119390 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 28445 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2023 02:28:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 22 Jan 2023 02:28:11 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 088B91804B0 for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2023 18:28:08 -0800 (PST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-vs1-f51.google.com (mail-vs1-f51.google.com [209.85.217.51]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2023 18:28:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vs1-f51.google.com with SMTP id j185so9560816vsc.13 for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2023 18:28:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=7LzRWSA6asOxfso9xh9GToCv5ZXdYY1BjZ7SgqNiWXw=; b=eTYyv69YfiznaVwNMaW5eOe6J6Z6kEJkClqkz2YIrCyUrscc2k0Fe0v8ROPgIfqPH8 HOEj+YOwVpj0bLisFWu1oE5/zwgUE8XkP0ogtIwrY4uDVLrLEat4T+PaF+H8xlBBzHWK 5zoULiMZqyrGpi8CHOSutm0zEpTe1+dhZLzrmfAQ/7TnRiqnaRhA2UcsvKshUg1aY8T2 yX3Uevk8tNP7NqsdpAXQPT1b+AHbnKaiCqUpQAJQoHIrtrYTaS+f7R+Jqk03wOcK8kYw xK1sLCtEbAPFPeQcinNIWVDzwckrmEJFXWMrj+Jc979wcoRgp5sAUHqMfQW6o/326YHg MRpw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=7LzRWSA6asOxfso9xh9GToCv5ZXdYY1BjZ7SgqNiWXw=; b=hwU+gLtOUtKy3YE/ixF3r5z9EkZbkki09dfUDQ7IRuoMnNLQpA94m6uuulTXBAkvF3 aQDxL+jVX5d38VLicVjQrWDZ/zdBOMxMKhtelbzAq2wyK2FHO6AsWT5PBYPD6UqZYTRM dW3oKdIKjtJ3rZRc0BwFG8T1Sa4/bbb+AP3JAcAJveGqzfC+CZ8DxVACKasgOM4UjK/z qWTMyT8ks6A3z8GeRaAD2kPhM0AqaDZXYPPzMPqo1MemCTQDc4gMdo6q6WqocPMgcKtO x+2lDR4o1z4qi0TunZ0Sf8/1krn2h0PjZUCFLOMGIq+hHKPWzwlfB1bBF2B0Undq14pM ojHA== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2kpQOToS9iFBeeTr95WgQ7SoitmtMpolmTm/tZWKd2fOhfJCSfmq VJBjk417oxAHbpKDeBei+CsQmCrJ7Zn91awsrOg1D/dm X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXupfI8VPypt91ny8bBm0mZcqXLliwZJ+dtcJXeWUF1gYpTCbzYWQEymxKJOlPU+O3s57kh4KRpN4Ec5KSqc9Bg= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:30a7:b0:3d3:d12d:4065 with SMTP id y7-20020a05610230a700b003d3d12d4065mr2784756vsd.70.1674354483661; Sat, 21 Jan 2023 18:28:03 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2023 23:27:53 -0300 Message-ID: To: Larry Garfield Cc: php internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003a11a405f2d108ca" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC][Vote] Asymmetric Visibility From: deleugyn@gmail.com (Deleu) --0000000000003a11a405f2d108ca Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > > The vote has now closed. > > The final result is 14 Yes, 12 No, which is less than the required 66%. > The RFC is declined. > Highly interesting to see that there's a theoretical path with a different syntax that takes 4 voters to yes and change the outcome to 18/26, which would have been an approved RFC. Working with readonly nowadays I can kinda see how a-viz would be nice, but if I had a vote I'm also in the camp that didn't like the syntax. > --0000000000003a11a405f2d108ca--