Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:77466 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 54429 invoked from network); 22 Sep 2014 13:37:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 22 Sep 2014 13:37:52 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=pierre.php@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=pierre.php@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.192.51 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: pierre.php@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.192.51 mail-qg0-f51.google.com Received: from [209.85.192.51] ([209.85.192.51:41871] helo=mail-qg0-f51.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 71/84-31799-F2620245 for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 09:37:51 -0400 Received: by mail-qg0-f51.google.com with SMTP id a108so2833557qge.24 for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 06:37:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=n32mw8pWnB14qX4B8LF18vyYHmnW7CiCgRvuU/7jMYY=; b=bmPp5U8o0496QXIQJKeN5S+s1/yYhReI2/rkgcHtEGLRpG+h9sRftHpEup4TcRdIjw kFRfW24dT8jaylRIApe3hb1urd1DkO2XhcLAITsKI84iCv/82MO8vJ/E/3E/BL1QNTjq xTLwa+0z3G6rsMfPbmRfagw8M6g85SNYR5j1ZBlgVUThVKySoGK5bCzmfy6LVTGqMdf0 SPkaOxA/lwe8J/PCCW1ZOJ9hal8RtFVnIzDiThWvb2KHTMRywYWIii/Xw+SrUaRJcTEe +DnndZLkH9qjoAlexRNRwacb805OCPN69gAvuliHU4JlIHji/Pd93ppt/fjxUz8Sw5Nw Jg5g== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.87.71 with SMTP id q65mr2935099qgd.94.1411393068706; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 06:37:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.22.51 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 06:37:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.22.51 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 06:37:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4D27A10E-6EC6-4806-94DB-1BF1B976CA7D@ajf.me> <600A7E27-7E6F-4ECF-805F-D62814AA3AB2@ajf.me> <5420198C.4070209@php.net> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 15:37:48 +0200 Message-ID: To: Derick Rethans Cc: Michael Wallner , Peter Cowburn , PHP internals , Andrea Faulds , Laruence Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113a695a7fb4880503a78ee7 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE][RFC] Integer Semantics From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye) --001a113a695a7fb4880503a78ee7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sep 22, 2014 3:31 PM, "Derick Rethans" wrote: > > On Mon, 22 Sep 2014, Michael Wallner wrote: > > > On 2014-09-22 14:08, Andrea Faulds wrote: > > > > > > On 22 Sep 2014, at 12:06, Derick Rethans wrote: > > > > > >> I would also like to point out that, just like a 8:8 vote is not a > > >> "50% majority", 16:8 is technically also not a two thirds > > >> *majority*. The RFC, like with many other important things is of > > >> course too vague on this. > > > > The "+1" is only for 50% majorities. > > > > > > > > An 8:8 vote is not a majority, no, but a 9:8 would be a 50%+1 > > > majority. > > > > > > A 16:8 vote *is* a 2/3 majority. > > > > Yes, I think so, too. > > I disagree, but the main point was something else. Right, but what would be 2/3 of 24 votes for you then? > The "voting RFC" should be more clear on this. I don't think it is now. > It's a pretty vague RFC in the first place, and leaves way too much > open for interpretation. For? # of votes? > cheers, > Derick --001a113a695a7fb4880503a78ee7--