Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:83240
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.41 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CADR=R-iBDWCAeaRh53txfKvvL4ccKA9Fr8Bg68wt0NEHkJefbQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAyV7nHHBxSPemoF0Gj+ridov99WFLMh-+nxDwBY5ikJwV0OUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADR=R-iBDWCAeaRh53txfKvvL4ccKA9Fr8Bg68wt0NEHkJefbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 15:49:08 -0500
Message-ID: <CAAyV7nEcOkFctzy0nYra2WSTKAHZ8UKB_r1mqmsGojZxAkR5pQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>
Cc: francois@php.net, Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk>, 
	PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Using Other Channels (was Scalar Type Declarations v0.5)
From: ircmaxell@gmail.com (Anthony Ferrara)

Stas,

>> I created a forked RFC. You can keep her as lead all you want, that
>> doesn't mean I can't move forward with my RFC.
>
> I think it would really be better to have a lot less "us vs them" and a
> bit more cooperative spirit here.

That ignores the mail that spawned this thread (and the one I got in
private) saying in no uncertain terms I shouldn't open a proposal (and
should abandon this one) because someone else was working on one. It
goes both ways.

And sometimes the best way to cooperate is to compete. That doesn't
mean we're enemies. It means we have different ideas. So we let the
ideas stand for themselves, away from ourselves.

>> That's fine. Let's let the votes decide rather than relying on
>> strongarming.
>
> And cooperation means a bit more than "we've got 66% so we don't care
> about anything else".

Again, please don't twist words. The point was there exists a proposal
which I believe can pass by a supermajority (and nearly did the first
time). Why should that be abandoned because some people disagree with
it? People disagree with proposals all the time. The way we've agreed
to solve that is voting. So isn't that the proper way forward?

I don't care if this proposal fails. If it's voted no, that's fine. I
think it has a shot to pass though, so shouldn't it be given a fair
chance?

Anthony