Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:84730
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.49 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: stelian.mocanita@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <CAFp73Xu8VVhQ3QP6wXCdosvN2XkvUYP7Scbp0JPvgwU2SOOJOQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BLU436-SMTP234CAFED9639237DE430B18E2190@phx.gbl>
	<325E0097-FD7E-4997-A95D-20C62368E162@zend.com>
	<55031C54.6060802@eliw.com>
	<CAMc0WS5MJ_RAtNO47R4wQjy8_YSDzzZeGECLUnzSVOAmB2JyPw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAFp73Xtk4-o=DjipY4niopmgg+JC+Yyju_oxUWKWEHqMgQoiOA@mail.gmail.com>
	<7CE491F0-C243-4788-ADA2-5DA9DF1D1168@php.net>
	<d40df0c5636fccd2dd672ad1a4b72ced@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEPJdukMnxn+Rjxy7tN0oSfoD_ryNwKDRLjJF6AAwGoWGH8WQA@mail.gmail.com>
	<332304ae552bfc635f999a8d73b505f0@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEZPtU7Yv4T2YJYm9B3jyoro+28opg1XtcrZAT9+ZTmVFkq4Cg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMc0WS5+AwBuyqE4BobM_MaR97gWPQQm+Ot2k1Jja+69JBTBHw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAFp73Xu8VVhQ3QP6wXCdosvN2XkvUYP7Scbp0JPvgwU2SOOJOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 23:30:10 +0100
Message-ID: <CAMc0WS7gYXCw_K9BYQnv3NJMm6BuomPVKbzKKrwQHUzJxjj3GA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "guilhermeblanco@gmail.com" <guilhermeblanco@gmail.com>
Cc: Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com>, 
	PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>, Benjamin Eberlei <kontakt@beberlei.de>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013c6af015f7a70511330bd8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Basic Scalar Types
From: stelianm@php.net (Stelian Mocanita)

--089e013c6af015f7a70511330bd8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

So sticking to the rules is now "playing law firm". The RFC Andreea
proposed has
been modified several times before going to vote. And we're not voting on
her RFC,
we're voting on Bob's that was proposed 2 days ago.

I have a feeling that this will go to vote tomorrow though.

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:26 PM, guilhermeblanco@gmail.com <
guilhermeblanco@gmail.com> wrote:

> And none answered me... is this RFC gonna be allowed to enter on voting
> phase for 7.0 or not?
>
> This drastically changes my voted on STH v5 which ends EOD today.
>
> []s,
>
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Stelian Mocanita <stelianm@php.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Zeev, allow me to understand how this goes. Bob's discussions on the RFC
>> started 2 days ago. Based on the current rules, the RFC can only go to
>> vote
>> after 2 weeks. That means in 12 days starting now.
>>
>> So we are either violating the RFC rules by pushing the vote tomorrow or
>> we're
>> delaying PHP7 for another 2 weeks maybe yet another TH RFC passes?
>>
>> Pointing at number 6 from https://wiki.php.net/rfc/howto
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:07 PM, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On Mar 14, 2015 9:03 AM, "Zeev Suraski" <zeev@zend.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > > Maybe I was na=C3=AFve, but I thought I had a better way to make bot=
h weak
>> &
>> > > strict camps happy,
>> >
>> > By dropping strict despite all discussions, proposing a pandara box rf=
c
>> by
>> > changing the casting rules and now suddenly proposing to go vote to ye=
t
>> > another "perfect" RFC? Sorry, it does not help anyone and damages php,
>> > creates yet more issues. This is not a good call.
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Guilherme Blanco
> MSN: guilhermeblanco@hotmail.com
> GTalk: guilhermeblanco
> Toronto - ON/Canada
>

--089e013c6af015f7a70511330bd8--