Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:71877 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 15696 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2014 13:35:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 31 Jan 2014 13:35:24 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=pierre.php@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=pierre.php@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.51 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: pierre.php@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.215.51 mail-la0-f51.google.com Received: from [209.85.215.51] ([209.85.215.51:51995] helo=mail-la0-f51.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id E9/51-09212-A96ABE25 for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 08:35:23 -0500 Received: by mail-la0-f51.google.com with SMTP id c6so3409576lan.24 for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 05:35:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=dzY/KIZSjPxBwXCOmUm70zEg9RUSMMs6STrV4DmSKDg=; b=P8ZGteuEmys3McskhmAmfxBds0Ok49v2MnVkWVlmiksxn7/8K8xMDD9nPgEyl8qQBH auAUg2ScTFD6/aOTjLJK1jbt3d/4v09IxVVFJ73lRzHVaTQDqco3tkf5buQzKz7KXRnE pKj6Lj/qSpJbcDznhtq691FfqjLTahFxXWN9M24RtmDjTwyJnw2OOY8fjwcDg2jP1SgW g0uzGsnqAB8mQ1/5jJm4L+8ntYLToAOYqwilgkrel7M8SfXXLJ/jmPye1YD8Gyq/8roh XSkhDTu1FGBnLFEGfqTZmj2c5cz80ggYuKGfzsd0X8QfTDnDpPrIDDYg1nLF1oOSnQEi gTdQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.21.74 with SMTP id t10mr77903lae.65.1391175319547; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 05:35:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.112.35.163 with HTTP; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 05:35:19 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1391174874.2941.160.camel@guybrush> References: <1391171792.2941.130.camel@guybrush> <1391174874.2941.160.camel@guybrush> Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 14:35:19 +0100 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?Q?Johannes_Schl=C3=BCter?= Cc: Anatol Belski , PHP Developers Mailing List , Matt Ficken , "Stephen A. Zarkos" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] 64 bit platform improvements for string length and integer From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye) On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Johannes Schl=C3=BCter wrote: > So what is the purpose of the rule? If a "normal" RFC vote can do > whatever it likes why have that rule? As you are the author I'm happy to > learn your interpretation. The RFC says that internals API and ABI can be broken in x.y+1. I have no idea where it says that it can't. However it cannot be an unilateral decision, why we have a RFC in this case f.e. unlike other changes in 5.4 or 5.5. >> > In my interpretation this rule is meant to allow >> > small changes, affecting only few extensions and where it would be >> > stupid to defer the. >> >> To defer the ...? > > ... the change. > >> At least you did not loose your sense of humor. > > Yes, humor indeed helps if the one who creates the rules is also the one > who tries to bend it the most. First, there are many authors. Secondly this RFC follows every single step of the RFC process and will do until the votes phase is over and accept the results, no matter how they look. --=20 Pierre @pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org