Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:75728 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 86475 invoked from network); 20 Jul 2014 21:32:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 20 Jul 2014 21:32:10 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ajf@ajf.me; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ajf@ajf.me; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain ajf.me designates 192.64.116.207 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ajf@ajf.me X-Host-Fingerprint: 192.64.116.207 imap2-2.ox.privateemail.com Received: from [192.64.116.207] ([192.64.116.207:42214] helo=imap2-2.ox.privateemail.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 46/56-48607-9553CC35 for ; Sun, 20 Jul 2014 17:32:09 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1810E8C007B; Sun, 20 Jul 2014 17:32:07 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at imap2.ox.privateemail.com Received: from mail.privateemail.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (imap2.ox.privateemail.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 0oc98YX3yRwS; Sun, 20 Jul 2014 17:32:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.0.15] (unknown [90.210.122.167]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5B7FB8C0075; Sun, 20 Jul 2014 17:32:04 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2014 22:32:00 +0100 Cc: Derick Rethans , PHP Internals Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: References: <84603C6F-F984-4F73-892A-4416391E4769@ajf.me> To: Nikita Popov X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE][RFC] Name of Next Release of PHP From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds) On 20 Jul 2014, at 22:28, Nikita Popov wrote: > After the vote has been started the RFC was edited by Zeev in order to = strengthen the case for PHP 7. There is nothing wrong with that, adding = additional arguments to an RFC is perfectly fine by me. >=20 > However at the same time a number of paragraphs were removed that were = arguing for PHP 6, at least in part. The only thing that was left in = "The case for PHP 6" was a single paragraph, of which half was really = just an explanation of the general situation. >=20 > Effectively the edits made the RFC text heavily biased. It's okay to = edit an RFC to add arguments for your side, but I find it discourteous = and disingenuous to remove arguments from the opposing side at the same = time. >=20 > As such I can understand Andrea's decision to close this vote until = tempers had time to cool down and both sides had a chance to be fairly = represented. It also wasn=92t really fair of me to start a vote when there wasn=92t = really a case for 7, now that I think about it. I suppose that makes my = later decision hypocritical, but it does mean we=92re in a better place = now when we have a second vote, as we have two cases. -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/