Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:82761
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.212.176 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <54E12093.2040803@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2015 22:41:23 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <82D0FEAC-4B86-4589-A21B-51A9E8795D8A@ajf.me> <54E118BC.2010009@gmail.com> <7C723F41-B7E2-440A-B96B-5BC799638CBE@ajf.me>
In-Reply-To: <7C723F41-B7E2-440A-B96B-5BC799638CBE@ajf.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] I quit.
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Collins)

On 15/02/2015 22:15, Andrea Faulds wrote:
> It might be for the best that we don’t keep it in voting. During the voting process, it became apparent that the declare() syntax (with all its idiosyncrasies) was a big problem (influencing at least 3 people’s votes), so much so that I decided that I’d make a follow-up RFC to fix it after voting ended, to avoid having to cancel the vote. Now that voting’s cancelled, that could be fixed properly if someone revived the RFC.

People voting one way or another, or their reasons for voting, should 
never be a reason to stop a vote, particularly one that has been going 
for so long, and received so many votes. That way, madness lies, because 
someone could keep closing and reopening different versions of a vote, 
and people whose vote was not influenced by that factor would have to 
keep remembering to re-register their unchanged vote.

If the vote fails, we know that some people may be persuaded to vote 
differently (in either direction) on a similar proposal with different 
syntax; if it passes, there is nothing to stop another vote defining a 
different syntax before 7.0 is released.

> I think the vote totals still make a statement. The vote may have ended 4 days early, but it’s only 1 vote short of a 2/3 majority.

That's why I think it should continue; so that that statement is not 
open to argument. Right now, anyone who disagrees with the result can 
simply say "well, it was closed early, so it's meaningless".

Regards,

-- 
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]