Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:76265
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.172 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: are.you.winning@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <CAPg3XxKTpMEFdYzrPOfNq4bSZAHeCH9dP1K=C0KSONKMZrsKHg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e5f19ac0089d24adc695fce93ad9bd9c.squirrel@webmail.klapt.com>
	<db6f4b4c2d10f343d4c30ee66d82b0eb@mail.gmail.com>
	<4ED7146272E04A47B986ED49E771E347BBDA6AAA06@Ikarus.ameusgmbh.intern>
	<CA+9eiLuqXs4f87bLb-vGL6AB=eEbR5khR1WtoVLwS0au7EpCOg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+9eiLsf7wpeVSKJS7i3zV=50sGFRz8+UfyQi0LuFeJ9OqDNRQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<slrnlnn83o.qd9.dsp@dsp.local>
	<CAEZPtU4B49JnhRT9FSSyAq2oCZ5i_qK_8UuwYR3G-W+gFsK0Fg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPg3XxKTpMEFdYzrPOfNq4bSZAHeCH9dP1K=C0KSONKMZrsKHg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 08:42:56 +0100
Message-ID: <CAGAGxbbw=Z_LJTYrnf1U_27YYRyAw+2AvZiE3VQO2NaYM4LivA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Cowburn <petercowburn@gmail.com>
Cc: Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>, David Soria Parra <dsp@php.net>, 
	PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] [RFC] 64 bit platform improvements for string
 length and integer
From: cw@daverandom.com (Chris Wright)

On 20 July 2014 16:44, Peter Cowburn <petercowburn@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 21 May 2014 07:24, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 8:34 PM, David Soria Parra <dsp@php.net> wrote:
>>
>> > Sounds very good and 0.8% overhead is fine. Can we work on getting thi=
s
>> > integrated into a v2 of the RFC, continue hopefully constructive
>> discussions for
>> > a week or two and then vote again. We aren't in a rush at the moment a=
s
>> > php.next is far away.
>>
>> That sounds like a good reason to restart, the ML issues are good
>> reasons to begin it again (sigh). However I am not even sure the
>> issues are fixed by now... No activity on systems lately.
>>
>
> This RFC is still listed as =E2=80=9Cin voting=E2=80=9D on the wiki.  Wha=
t is its current
> state?
>

Bump.

Still listed as being in voting phase, and votes are still open.