Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:75292
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.219.42 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <-1874712400170500779@unknownmsgid>
References: <61EEC54E-7B8D-433E-A391-75F8D6A41E79@ajf.me>
	<1E40C2BC-3C86-4D20-9C34-C8E0B6BFF925@ajf.me>
	<-1874712400170500779@unknownmsgid>
Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2014 15:32:53 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKOpQSxOW09fVDmycnJkaUOYttYeDb2rebSseE_svZ53p73cMQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com>
Cc: Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>, PHP <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8ff1ce1080d1f404fd8df07b
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Name of Next Release of PHP
From: kris.craig@gmail.com (Kris Craig)

--e89a8ff1ce1080d1f404fd8df07b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

>
> As such I'd like to coauthor it with you and represent the case for 7.
>

Andrea, I would *strongly* recommend that you accept Zeev's offer and make
him a co-author.  You did present at least a partial argument for breaking
the convention, but I think they do have a valid grievance in that some of
their arguments are being left-out.  This is understandable, as you have a
bias in favor of preserving the order and keeping it at PHP 6.  I actually
agree with you 100% on this-- but that just means that I'm biased, too.

It seems only fair that someone biased on the other side should be allowed
to present his arguments and I'm sure he can be trusted to keep his edits
to that one section.  Likewise, you can then focus on expanding the
arguments for preserving the convention if you think that's necessary.

And thanks for updating the required majority.  "2/3 either way" just
seemed too ambiguous and confusing.  In the unlikely event of an exact tie,
I think we'd just regard the RFC as moot and proceed as if this RFC had
never been presented.  I'll certainly be arguing strongly in favor of PHP 6
being the next version as I have in the past, but in the interest of
fairness, Zeev should be made a co-author and given the mandate to write a
section representing the arguments against PHP 6.  That way, if the vote
goes for PHP 6 and people want to say it's because the arguments against in
the RFC weren't good enough, that'll be on him instead of you.

--Kris

--e89a8ff1ce1080d1f404fd8df07b--