Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:84872
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.213.46 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <d29a6faab8dd07ce62f6df153c400b03@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BLU436-SMTP63B4758D2D902644C6BB24E2050@phx.gbl>
	<d29a6faab8dd07ce62f6df153c400b03@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 18:59:46 +0000
Message-ID: <CALwr1GnMyQrJno24k+hC5WobE29VsQJqcirBYm5XucjW2dxWQA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com>
Cc: Bob Weinand <bobwei9@hotmail.com>, PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [INFO] Basic Scalar Types
From: padraic.brady@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?P=C3=A1draic_Brady?=)

On 15 March 2015 at 16:55, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> wrote:
> Bob,
>
> Thanks for the update.  This time, though, although I completely respect
> your decision not to put your RFC into a vote unless the Dual STH mode
> fails, I'd like to either (with your permission) take over the RFC or
> propose my own copy and move it to voting as soon as allowed.  This, unde=
r
> a commitment that if I see that Basic STH is failing to garner a clear
> majority, I'll retract it and move to support the Dual STH RFC instead fo=
r
> the sake of unity.

No one individual has the right to break the existing rules around
voting. There has been more than sufficient time to date to rewrite
the voting rules, debate voting rights, extend PHP7's deadline, or
propose the basic RFC so described. A vote in contravention of the
voting rules at the last possible minute cannot, by definition, be
recognised at this time. I wouldn't even vote since it might lend it
an air of ill deserved legitimacy, forgetting for a moment whether a
few PEAR contributions make me any more deserving of a vote than
others.

I recognise that the rules are inconvenient in the current situation
when time is in short supply, but that is why we have rules to offset
the temptation of doing things considered socially unacceptable. They
were voted on, they were adopted, and they remain adopted. There is
only one way in which they may be unadopted. Another RFC. Yes, PHP,
this is a government bureaucracy at work ;).

I'm not a lawyer, and I wouldn't appreciate the intended spirit of the
rules. Unfortunately, we don't have judges or juries, so all we can do
is abide by the letter of the rules as written, a contract all of us
have with the PHP community. Is that a perfect approach? Hell, no.
What is? It's just the only approach we can possibly follow on Sunday,
March 15th.

If this RFC enters into voting in any time period not allowed within
the rules as they are written, I will obviously not recognise it as
valid in any way.

Paddy

--
P=C3=A1draic Brady

http://blog.astrumfutura.com
http://www.survivethedeepend.com