Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:74308 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 81494 invoked from network); 17 May 2014 20:41:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 17 May 2014 20:41:39 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=zeev@zend.com; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=zeev@zend.com; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com from 209.85.220.179 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: zeev@zend.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.220.179 mail-vc0-f179.google.com Received: from [209.85.220.179] ([209.85.220.179:64624] helo=mail-vc0-f179.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 06/06-53190-289C7735 for ; Sat, 17 May 2014 16:41:38 -0400 Received: by mail-vc0-f179.google.com with SMTP id im17so7940105vcb.10 for ; Sat, 17 May 2014 13:41:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :thread-index:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=PvnuX4PfRuJzdrfqCgyqUwfz1pjBUzlwN40BSSgbAxs=; b=jOTlnybhGaEdeBmkFnbX1ULAzj1kBodtU/mJB1Bc+4y7r1JoFRz1UecosNXqnKlp4i AVUBmlmb1OWUnbxx/lQQcArMWOeHAWWG/208HMDwuJGyrWDh3imEZlBKBm/A0RNxBeL4 2AQjvdHbOF9keDGi8q/Qxj2qfoaAkgiiXXoA1RohlnCZ6IeEA6mrs2/B1CcHVppcb2Wg A84tdc3hx/l2Zjlf2StC2lnY1YQRu2zeDBjYaDOZFlXfghTMz/GKW/j9PvOG4LaFlZp2 DI5IT/un22TQhaVnBIAQpZLWPhyw9iTUTXOLblgzN64zcZzkMiVuqPXcu/q38OT21Ycu qhBQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQki7/qQC1KGgf5/KhQ6QZbhTwncpTs40qTfm6K3h3hdlqNPdfGKjFCO+lSST1vDeezRge1J0REpm+PFyPOSgg1Q/xOoK0Famrag9BTBWPdvtj/ymcUpJXZ4kCHY90lAFnOcXS+v X-Received: by 10.220.253.132 with SMTP id na4mr4662240vcb.39.1400359295738; Sat, 17 May 2014 13:41:35 -0700 (PDT) References: <46e6ebb1de57c25be1bb5eb3bdfab1b5@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQEi6UVUcXSEPIPlKn/YMRA/WwvlRwEsiiJ8ASsm2dKci4+QYA== Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 23:41:33 +0300 Message-ID: <94d904f35f0a73eb80f6de7017931011@mail.gmail.com> To: Ferenc Kovacs Cc: Levi Morrison , internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1133ddf8619be404f99e8e54 Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Building a better PHP together. From: zeev@zend.com (Zeev Suraski) --001a1133ddf8619be404f99e8e54 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think it is ok to rally people for voting or making them aware that something will go through which they probably don't want to, and also ok to reconsider based and giving them reasons. But I think that prominent people like you should refrain from asking people to vote no while providing only generic/blanket statments ("morally wrong", etc.) because you are in a position where some people will just blindly follow what you say, and we should vote purely on the base on the technical merit of the proposed rfc, and not based on which sides has the more prominent people supporting it. I wish that were true but the numbers prove otherwise J Regardless, my =E2=80=98call for help=E2=80=99 was very much in context (ev= en if terse), it wasn=E2=80=99t a =E2=80=98vote No because I say so=E2=80=99. It also follo= wed a long online debate on internals@ where I expressed my opinion very clearly. I=E2=80=99d agree that =E2=80=98Vote X and get $500=E2=80=99, =E2=80=98Vote= Y for a spot in heaven=E2=80=99, or =E2=80=98Vote Z because I say so=E2=80=99 are no-no=E2=80=99s. --001a1133ddf8619be404f99e8e54--