Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:84873
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 209.85.212.177 as permitted sender)
References: <BLU436-SMTP63B4758D2D902644C6BB24E2050@phx.gbl>
	<d29a6faab8dd07ce62f6df153c400b03@mail.gmail.com> <CALwr1GnMyQrJno24k+hC5WobE29VsQJqcirBYm5XucjW2dxWQA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALwr1GnMyQrJno24k+hC5WobE29VsQJqcirBYm5XucjW2dxWQA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Thread-Index: AQKV59C6R/g00R7Uu5aQCj/uhXIapAFVjcT/AZ4zTjObezdYEA==
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 21:07:08 +0200
Message-ID: <6e268626bc6b84a3886f39442c827bb6@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?P=C3=A1draic_Brady?= <padraic.brady@gmail.com>
Cc: 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: zeev@zend.com (Zeev Suraski)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: P=C3=A1draic Brady [mailto:padraic.brady@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2015 9:00 PM
> To: Zeev Suraski
> Cc: Bob Weinand; PHP Internals
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [INFO] Basic Scalar Types
>
> 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, under 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 for 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.

No rule is being broken.

The PHP 7 timeline RFC (wiki.php.net/rfc/php7timeline) states the following=
:
Line up any remaining RFCs that target PHP 7.0.   |	Now - Mar 15 (4+
additional months)

As Bob pointed out, what 'Line up' means - whether it means vote ends, vote
begins, or discussion begins - is completely open to interpretation.  I
don't remember what I meant when I wrote it, but arguably, 'line up' is a
lot closer to 'start discussing' than 'finish voting', and as is typically
the case when something is unclear, the most lax interpretation is
acceptable.

Zeev