Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:119472 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 83338 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2023 18:38:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 6 Feb 2023 18:38:45 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B63BD180546 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 10:38:44 -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=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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-f44.google.com (mail-vs1-f44.google.com [209.85.217.44]) (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 ; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 10:38:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vs1-f44.google.com with SMTP id a24so13697528vsl.2 for ; Mon, 06 Feb 2023 10:38:44 -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=lvY+zotFk3rbUiuSoKoJQX1439G3onwwd/ZD9YHsuCM=; b=Ux53QWDTnZu3y/a2XNh5Dr6K6dweqAZDPmlEYgXy9j/nVy9xAGvsjXN2XEpCeO0lK5 v2DHzdvonwGS3qEYlEfMh4q6R6XEdxLn3tcKbBgEFAhZs3wNj1GLcd+RzhBZUnGLkpDR Xjfvz0Z7HVOse+cliLNUW0b+LYZjKU5YoElkJYx9NFk6f73VOvA6aHVBvC/AfpmKj4vi FaQ6EJ+kCcIOf2CbjucPxeZWbK0RfWGFkx+yjx1aRpBJQXun4c19gpTYMfLsaHKTtRMs 56QZKT7Z30tlwXsvPuO7YrGd++Nl5pXRK0lvVkGTR9QfMYocsm5EERlEAtrKoRWvbuL1 k2uQ== 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=lvY+zotFk3rbUiuSoKoJQX1439G3onwwd/ZD9YHsuCM=; b=Ze0XUG0dMoJfL7iWLnoJc6ZO0PHIGRNDq7ggDUaOt2OvBpqNb1m1D0FmnXPDEZ33HN OHZidbGtnUET7kRq6acX6fsJx8WmJfDkmT+nTAr5eWwm7PDaP3EiLZnqbjHIaetWD6i6 FgmIDoSMxHDIqZNB+EAcTBjTcQO/EGnHQjOb4FmKkjUKHVqYHGDVJgVH/t8koAwFIt74 rulP3f28+XBj6emHTNjMNMGOA1NZj4pAHzusnrwGr5NVjaOKzSlFfP0DK/bvL35Z5ePZ 4DQ8I+6Gty8C+oYMiaZuLvnSIp/7KDHPAgo/bNIecwssdKLXACmpaKupGd1m1kextROY 2YbQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKXIqQf227o543gFXcyRUxnOfNNpGUu9n3jmWRMhlUV8LD18OX4T lYQZOMvIytd/ZhCl5+FQ1wO1v5tiTGV90kSCqrA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set9Mm+LgK4ve/VWcxWhqAT+5cbykjG2AH0v3oiKbmyAceomV4VDwQomtcPUtS0qPGeNDMfYdqkJpJx4m+vmlcUU= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:5617:b0:410:6375:2281 with SMTP id de23-20020a056102561700b0041063752281mr120627vsb.43.1675708723570; Mon, 06 Feb 2023 10:38:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 11:38:32 -0700 Message-ID: To: Dan Ackroyd Cc: =?UTF-8?B?TcOhdMOpIEtvY3Npcw==?= , =?UTF-8?Q?Alexandru_P=C4=83tr=C4=83nescu?= , PHP Internals List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000372cea05f40c5798" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Discussion] Typed class constants From: mbniebergall@gmail.com (Mark Niebergall) --000000000000372cea05f40c5798 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Dan, On Sat, Feb 4, 2023 at 8:34 AM Dan Ackroyd wrote: > Hi Mark, > > On Sat, 4 Feb 2023 at 00:22, Mark Niebergall > wrote: > > > > This is also a bigger policy question for other seemingly-abandoned > > RFCs. If it is agreed that a new RFC should be created in this scenario, > > I've added some notes on the page https://wiki.php.net/rfc/howto > > I had some words already prepared from something I will post > separately, but may as well post here also: > > Mailing list etiquette - > https://github.com/Danack/RfcCodex/blob/master/etiquette/mailing_list.md > > Mailing list etiquette for young'uns - > > https://github.com/Danack/RfcCodex/blob/master/etiquette/mailing_list_for_younguns.md > > RFC attitudes - > https://github.com/Danack/RfcCodex/blob/master/etiquette/rfc_attitudes.md > > RFC etiquette - > https://github.com/Danack/RfcCodex/blob/master/etiquette/rfc_etiquette.md > > Most of the stuff in there is just etiquette rather than rules, so > probably isn't appropriate for the wiki. > > Thanks, these are actually very helpful and insightful. > > > I did leave Benas as an author to give him credit for the work he did. > > Although well intentioned, that's probably quite a no-no. Putting > someone's name on something they don't necessarily agree with is > likely to cause drama. I've added a note on that also. > > > With the reverting, valuable community input was dismissed. An effort > should > > be made to address applicable previous community input instead of just > > reverting it out. > > Probably not. > > It's up to other people to persuade RFC authors why something should > be included, rather than RFC authors having to take time and energy to > justify why they are reverting unapproved edits to their RFC. > > But yep, if you want to do it as part of a separate RFC, go for it. > I'll be doing that as a separate RFC, after the typed constants RFC settles. > > cheers > Dan > Ack > --000000000000372cea05f40c5798--