Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:65252
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain nebm.ist.utl.pt from 193.136.128.21 cause and error)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
To: "PHP Internals" <internals@lists.php.net>, "Alan Knowles" <alan@roojs.com>
References: <op.wq746rv5idpuyk@damnation.nl.lo.geleia.net>
 <op.wrmidlpiidpuyk@damnation.nl.lo.geleia.net>
 <debcd9bb-79f3-4b2c-aa66-9461018959c9@email.android.com>
 <op.wrmkyvlwidpuyk@damnation.nl.lo.geleia.net>
 <1460659e-237d-4c7c-8cfa-523ec857d646@email.android.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:01:45 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: =?utf-8?Q?N=C3=BAcleo_de_Eng=2E_Biom=C3=A9di?=
 =?utf-8?Q?ca_do_I=2ES=2ET=2E?=
Message-ID: <op.wrmmo7coidpuyk@damnation.nl.lo.geleia.net>
In-Reply-To: <1460659e-237d-4c7c-8cfa-523ec857d646@email.android.com>
User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.12 (Linux)
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Deprecate and remove calls from incompatible
 context
From: glopes@nebm.ist.utl.pt ("Gustavo Lopes")

On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:49:26 +0100, Alan Knowles <alan@roojs.com> wrote:

> I was trying to vote against, for what it's worth.
>
> It's a major bc break with no obvious value, and what appears to be 7  
> days given to vote when every one is busy discussing a new property  
> syntax.
>
> Traits is cute, but this was a amazing feature of the PHP language, not  
> obvious, but it's pretty similar to Javascript, not sure why it would be  
> so confusing.....
>
> Sorry for being contrary, but i was a but shocked that this was.going to  
> be removed
>

You had more than 6 months to voice your concerns. There was a discussion  
when the feature was proposed during summer. I'm sorry you did not notice  
it, but I can't be spamming the list every once in a while to maximize the  
number of people that are aware of what's going on.

Concerns about voting periods not having an upper bound notwithstanding,  
there was nothing remotely irregular about the way the process was  
conducted. I therefore find your comments about "sneaking this in" rather  
odd. Blame yourself instead.

Again, I'm not commenting on the merits.

-- 
Gustavo Lopes