Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:59103
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.210.42 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAKOpQSwP2FxO0U=mi81Yhrzex-876nqPpogCg-wzu52m-JCr7Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <slrnjmgm8f.mfm.dsp@experimentalworks.net>
	<CAKxcST_VqXXaxHvLhnxd6ata-RMboF4kCZzCSRdQJQF0hWRZkw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKOpQSykJTJbiwCh7Y3FJsM5LAp1sCgK4W33et8jzsMWbsv1fA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F68BFBA.1050605@gmx.net>
	<CAKOpQSzS-pAxJ_WpU7sWru8aGA712RcL5Ky0UCsuFSDp8S_u5g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADh7vovLQX9nJhmbdjCQeJHKimxpYnjucKGLX2PTnhv6F14Bmw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKOpQSxwhpxbs0ebSoz_c=77_9mfCmv8NmB=ZMuH46wbrYmp1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F68E101.1010303@sugarcrm.com>
	<CAKOpQSy_xPus9K=r3SEKx+G=LXLRxrE7jjh_S=Xr1wdBxDUg+Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAH-PCH7Tc_X67aqGK78WHKpcAxLupBy05CSZF4T-WaOTO+eaNA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKOpQSwP2FxO0U=mi81Yhrzex-876nqPpogCg-wzu52m-JCr7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 00:08:47 +0100
Message-ID: <CAH-PCH5qUCKLMNa4mxXVc1Pbr_0pnrttrdzrcMBc4O16c9xH+g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kris Craig <kris.craig@gmail.com>
Cc: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>, 
	"internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b10cac1dcaa2404bbb4c172
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Github Pull Request
From: tyra3l@gmail.com (Ferenc Kovacs)

--047d7b10cac1dcaa2404bbb4c172
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

>
>
> The horse is already dead.  Why are you still wacking it with a stick?
>

that was my first and only reply to you about this issue, and this will be
my last one, I promise.


> Last time I checked, the PHP Group doesn't take orders from Github.


we don't, my point was that if you really want to fix that terminology
"issue", it would make more sense to complain at the source.
as you have seen and said yourself, most people around here are familiar
with the term, so there is no confusion to be fixed here.


>   We have the power to use whatever internal terminology we damn well
> please with or without their permission.


sure, you can, as github also had that option, and it seems that their
terminology got more traction than yours.


>   But again, why do you insist on resurrecting this dead discussion??


that's redundant, see above.



> I've already acknowledged repeatedly that I'm in the minority on this
> one.


yeah, and in this very same mail you still questioning why should we use
the generally accepted term, so?


> But just because you and a few other stuffed shirts don't understand the
> value of dissenting viewpoints,


that's so nice of you


> that doesn't mean that said dissent amounts to "noise."


your mail didn't really added anything valuable, got called out as noise,
it happens.


> Maybe some people here aren't accustomed to having their edicts challenge=
d.


nah, thanks to you and a few other folks those people are constantly
practicing to endure that.


>   Either way, I've noticed a consistent pattern of dissenting views being
> clamped-down and summarily dismissed in the same manner; that is, in part=
,
> what prompted me to become more active on here to begin with.  I.e. becau=
se
> I'm accustomed to dealing with a tough room.  I'm a liberal intellectual =
in
> the U.S., so being in the oft-dismissed and shouted-down minority is
> something I am very much used to.  =3D)
>

the idea never occured to you that maybe there is some connection between
your attitude and those "tough rooms" and "stuffed shirts" that you see
everywhere?


>
> But seriously, the discussion on the terminology has already ended.
> Everything has been said.  I don't like the choice that the majority has
> made but I'll just have to live with it.


hurray


>   I made my suggestion, presented my argument, and this time it just
> didn't have legs.


which is a good thing, and appreciated.


>   You win some, you lose some; I'm ok with that.  I still believe a more
> accurate term would be better but I've already moved on.  It's time for y=
ou
> to do the same and let it go.  You're not accomplishing anything by
> continuing to drag this out.  Let the dead horse rest in peace.


let's do that.

--=20
Ferenc Kov=C3=A1cs
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu

--047d7b10cac1dcaa2404bbb4c172--