Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:84931
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.52 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: stelian.mocanita@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <0c0384ccae70e31bb7faae8ed7084759@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ad9f741052c0682e46b56fb81da04f7b@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMc0WS4qVmD5_sdiDLsGm0P6Pd+W2QQgWyfYUvow77_HTejV1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<0c0384ccae70e31bb7faae8ed7084759@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 22:43:20 +0100
Message-ID: <CAMc0WS5P-RNcac_Vv7QyorAX1DwJrDqeeSE6+rb7kC=214LmNQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c34cae4ec6f605115a9ff5
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Basic STH - status & unofficial poll
From: stelianm@php.net (Stelian Mocanita)

--001a11c34cae4ec6f605115a9ff5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Truth be told that might just be a record for number of no votes in a 10
minutes window! :) Also I thought this was all about elephants ...

On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 10:40 PM, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> wrote:

> Stelian,
>
> Respectfully, I think internals@ is being just a bit too uptight here.
> First, I did ask Bob before doing this, and while he said he thought it
> wasn't a good idea (mostly because of feedback such as yours) - he didn't
> 'block' me.
>
> Secondly, can we all relax a bit with the rules, RFCs, legalese and what'=
s
> allowed and not allowed to do?  It's a simple POLL.  I'm not abusing
> anything, I'm not pretending it replaces the vote and I actually know
> there'd be at least some people that won't vote in the same way that they
> would in case Basic really comes up for a vote.  It's to gauge the waters=
,
> nothing more, and nothing less.
>
> Last, it's completely identical to me asking on the list how people would
> vote in case Bob's RFC became available for a vote.  Except it's a lot
> easier to track and much more likely to get a large number of responses.
>
> Let's not make an elephant out of a mouse.  FWIW, so far I'm getting
> excellent cooperation from the Strict campers on this unofficial poll :)
>
> Zeev
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: stelian.mocanita@gmail.com [mailto:stelian.mocanita@gmail.com]
> > On Behalf Of Stelian Mocanita
> > Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2015 11:11 PM
> > To: Zeev Suraski
> > Cc: PHP internals
> > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Basic STH - status & unofficial poll
> >
> > Now you are just pushing the limits and doing things your way. Bob
> clearly
> > stated he does not want a vote and you want with an "unofficial poll"?
> >
> > You need to learn to let things go their course and not always push
> > matters
> > your way. I do not see how you can pull this move yet still be offended
> > when
> > people call you out on political moves.
> >
> > I hereby kindly ask you to retract this "unofficial poll" and let thing=
s
> > go their
> > way, whatever they might be.
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 10:03 PM, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >       All,
> >
> >
> >
> >       First, I decided not to propose Basic STH under my name, despite
> the
> > fact I
> >       think that not committing to put it to a vote adds unneeded risk
> for
> >       delivering STH in PHP 7.0.  Whether or not it=E2=80=99s put to a =
vote will
> be up
> > to
> >       Bob.
> >
> >
> >
> >       Secondly, I do want to attempt to understand what will happen if =
&
> > when the
> >       Basic STH RFC goes to a vote at some later point in the future
> (which
> >       according to Bob, will happen if the Dual Mode RFC fails).  If I
> see
> > that
> >       Basic STH is going to fail, I=E2=80=99ll change my vote to be in =
favor of
> the
> > Dual
> >       Mode STH RFC,  call upon everyone to do the same, and retract my
> > Coercive
> >       mode RFC.
> >
> >
> >
> >       This unofficial-non-RFC poll is here:
> > wiki.php.net/notrfc/scalar_type_hints
> >
> >
> >
> >       Thanks,
> >
> >
> >
> >       Zeev
> >
> >
>

--001a11c34cae4ec6f605115a9ff5--