Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:84738 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 46011 invoked from network); 13 Mar 2015 23:08:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 13 Mar 2015 23:08:22 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=bobwei9@hotmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=bobwei9@hotmail.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain hotmail.com designates 65.55.111.89 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: bobwei9@hotmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 65.55.111.89 blu004-omc2s14.hotmail.com Received: from [65.55.111.89] ([65.55.111.89:64524] helo=BLU004-OMC2S14.hotmail.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 63/68-34457-3ED63055 for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2015 18:08:21 -0500 Received: from BLU436-SMTP200 ([65.55.111.72]) by BLU004-OMC2S14.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(7.5.7601.22751); Fri, 13 Mar 2015 16:07:20 -0700 X-TMN: [OwCzkJZrpFE+ODmjD+iQSvnwkGYEs60p] X-Originating-Email: [bobwei9@hotmail.com] Message-ID: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_CC946EC4-0B69-41D5-909A-E9FD635DA087" MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\)) In-Reply-To: <332304ae552bfc635f999a8d73b505f0@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 00:07:14 +0100 CC: Zeev Suraski , guilhermeblanco@gmail.com References: <325E0097-FD7E-4997-A95D-20C62368E162@zend.com> <55031C54.6060802@eliw.com> <7CE491F0-C243-4788-ADA2-5DA9DF1D1168@php.net> <332304ae552bfc635f999a8d73b505f0@mail.gmail.com> To: PHP Internals List X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Mar 2015 23:07:18.0168 (UTC) FILETIME=[73DE3980:01D05DE2] Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Basic Scalar Types From: bobwei9@hotmail.com (Bob Weinand) --Apple-Mail=_CC946EC4-0B69-41D5-909A-E9FD635DA087 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > Am 13.03.2015 um 23:03 schrieb Zeev Suraski : >=20 > Maybe I was na=C3=AFve, but I thought I had a better way to make both = weak & > strict camps happy, instead of just ignoring the strict camp = altogether. > While there was some opposition to it - it mostly came from the main > proponents of the Strict camp, and, well, you :) Clearly right now it = seems > that not a lot of people bought into the coercive approach, and while = I hope > it can be turned around - I realize the chances for that happening = aren't > stellar. Given we can go to a vote on Bob's RFC tomorrow without = having to > delay the PHP 7 timeline, I don't see strong reasons not to do it, and = put > to rest any theories about what might have happened if v0.1 ever went = for a > vote. >=20 > Zeev I won't go into vote tomorrow. Given that we already discussed that proposal a lot a few months ago = (Andreas v1), we can go for a discussion phase a bit shorter (like 10 = days total), but I won't put a new RFC into vote tomorrow. Especially as = it's still being heavily discussed. Also, this vote is just valid in case where other votes fail - so we = actually don't *compete* with Anthonys RFC. It doesn't affect the voting = period of Anthonys RFC. We can have the vote still going on a few days = after both RFCs failed. This RFC is only about the common part of both RFCs. Bob @Guilherme: I intend to put it into vote, yes.= --Apple-Mail=_CC946EC4-0B69-41D5-909A-E9FD635DA087--