Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:76453
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: softfail (pb1.pair.com: domain golemon.com does not designate 209.85.192.170 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: php@golemon.com
In-Reply-To: <BEDB9A15-DBC6-4C7F-BEA2-31779534EFA1@ajf.me>
References: <CAESVnVqd6m5-Dmhff0OiSFZxRNVBX8AvCQQmVYnDt7+gOJ-xug@mail.gmail.com>
	<BEDB9A15-DBC6-4C7F-BEA2-31779534EFA1@ajf.me>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 14:36:13 -0700
Message-ID: <CAESVnVrM6=TPVXbfSnV+jP=Lmiie83-fx6JdJcxENhLWbiZa6Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Mutliple defaults in switch statements
From: pollita@php.net (Sara Golemon)

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 10:08 AM, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:
> On 12 Aug 2014, at 17:53, Sara Golemon <pollita@php.net> wrote:
>> Voting is open: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/switch.default.multiple#vote
>
> I=E2=80=99m all for this, but the *minimum* discussion period is *two* we=
eks.
>
The two-week period is advisory and we don't need to get hung up on
process for the sake of process.  There's been no meaningful
discussion in the past week because nobody thinks this is remotely a
bad idea.  Hell, some have questioned why this was put into an RFC in
the first place. (It's arguably a bug, since the existing behavior
could never have been described as right or intentional).

If you're so worried about violating RFC process, I can revoke it
entirely and just commit it without voting, and I'd be completely in
the right.  Or, we can apply a reasonable amount of process without
getting hung up on seven days worth of... no discussion whatsoever.

-Sara