Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:65296
Return-Path: <zeev@zend.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 87907 invoked from network); 28 Jan 2013 19:53:31 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 28 Jan 2013 19:53:31 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=zeev@zend.com; sender-id=unknown
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=zeev@zend.com; spf=unknown; sender-id=unknown
Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com does not designate 209.85.214.180 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: zeev@zend.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.214.180 mail-ob0-f180.google.com  
Received: from [209.85.214.180] ([209.85.214.180:39756] helo=mail-ob0-f180.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id C9/BB-28517-A37D6015 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 14:53:31 -0500
Received: by mail-ob0-f180.google.com with SMTP id ef5so3105045obb.25
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:53:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=google.com; s=20120113;
        h=x-received:from:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:x-mailer
         :thread-index:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type
         :x-gm-message-state;
        bh=yoAUhGWCfEHP9YkxZAZpXgU8pXWY1ex3F29iWjNBygQ=;
        b=XJ5/j1YHXn6DW0yZmja9HXQBnYr5qmt1fsHrjBPk9Gvd0OnalUJrnMR8rMYBJAvF9x
         HNe+QAPwISriueQQeX/GU/EaJxHBRz9+dDv8mhdfl9G6NMyY1yIVPs3QS45MPtSABmHT
         6gFSAM+dypHSwKImGCrHNJWGldn23E70TS/sNeapVioqVD2gCO+SCo8Su+cv/XyqiUBJ
         cyArpHuUFVOIs+34uxn4GLrrdzSqyyI5Q65LsJtjkQTqqM4GNnM/sCuqA4YtocHQE6o/
         amBG0lpLfPdXjVD6j0DTDNSQmGEOhAfxSPMnZm4QzbEK/xLREWLUl+7/V3asJvEu4TV7
         raDw==
X-Received: by 10.60.32.44 with SMTP id f12mr12639964oei.61.1359402807461;
 Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:53:27 -0800 (PST)
References: <CAAyV7nEWFMqBhKE-Q=MquMANmWp+p27Dn-X7nA5ocWRDHshEKA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAyV7nEWFMqBhKE-Q=MquMANmWp+p27Dn-X7nA5ocWRDHshEKA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQIMSip7vyeFE0OxpGcbetYSnOfklZfijWKg
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 21:53:22 +0200
Message-ID: <8443b1f0eaec6316a3e5791c097d5c49@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com>, internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmISDW/hr6g9F0+xl6SqmK1du15YeIg4KKTADoQJkJkyDcv9xxTABzK2ktBH+xXNbCjhkys41F3jxO3UuGuomTXUWO6+TcBZ3pS8qY1/bXJiOEill+Wrfo+FgcwwS8osrEP1wGM
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Purpose of voting
From: zeev@zend.com (Zeev Suraski)

> What should we be voting on when voting on an RFC: on the RFC proposed
> feature, or on the patch itself?

I think it should be exclusively on the concept.  We never vote about code
changes anywhere - including when we refactor existing parts.  Why would
we vote about the implementation here?

The concept is the important part, not the implementation.

Zeev