Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:85234
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.192.175 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <550B1EDC.9030200@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 12:09:16 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dan Ackroyd <danack@basereality.com>, francois@php.net
CC: Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <885a29db28bc96b2d3cd2ac96907e39f@mail.gmail.com>	<077401d06268$2b597c30$820c7490$@php.net> <CA+kxMuRG7RV74uD=pJxB2M3LS9Ty1xB-+TN_ddMpYg4xgtjpwA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+kxMuRG7RV74uD=pJxB2M3LS9Ty1xB-+TN_ddMpYg4xgtjpwA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Question/comment about the Array to String conversion
 RFC
From: smalyshev@gmail.com (Stanislav Malyshev)

Hi!

>> As you may have noticed if you had a look at the RFC or twitter, I have decided to follow people's suggestion.
>> Please note that the switch from E_DEPRECATED to fatal error won't require any new RFC/discussion/vote
>> as the  fatal error is considered as approved. I just introduce an E_DEPRECATED phase for 7.0.
> 
> What. The. Fuck.

Let's tone down here. While editing RFC anytime after the vote has
started without advanced notice is unacceptable and should not be done,
I don't think it's anything but a honest mistake. Of course, even more
unacceptable is to change it when voting results are in. But let's not
create more drama of it then necessary. Wikipedia has a rule that says
"assume good faith" (yes, I know in practice it is more complicated :) -
I think we could use more invocation of this rule here too.

It looks like the RFC author has not really decided what he wants to do.
If he doesn't want to support the RFC anymore, as voted, he can just
withdraw it and let somebody pick it up if willing (that's what happened
to <=> RFC and scalar typing RFC, so we have precedents). Or create a
new different one to supersede the old one. What not should be done of
course is editing voted RFC and using that as a base for changes.

-- 
Stas Malyshev
smalyshev@gmail.com