Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90593 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 94272 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2016 10:14:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 13 Jan 2016 10:14:11 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lester@lsces.co.uk; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lester@lsces.co.uk; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lsces.co.uk from 217.147.176.204 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.147.176.204 mail4.serversure.net Linux 2.6 Received: from [217.147.176.204] ([217.147.176.204:42083] helo=mail4.serversure.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id D4/A1-13057-17326965 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 05:14:10 -0500 Received: (qmail 9520 invoked by uid 89); 13 Jan 2016 10:14:06 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.3.1 ppid: 9513, pid: 9517, t: 0.0852s scanners: attach: 1.3.1 clamav: 0.96/m:52/d:10677 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.0.0.7?) (lester@rainbowdigitalmedia.org.uk@81.138.11.136) by mail4.serversure.net with ESMTPA; 13 Jan 2016 10:14:06 -0000 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <8B865D2A-6762-430D-9EA1-9B693DE8E8C3@zort.net> <56948002.1080802@gmail.com> <5695A417.4090902@gmail.com> Message-ID: <5696236E.30100@lsces.co.uk> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 10:14:06 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Internals and Newcomers and the Sidelines (WAS: Adopt Code of Conduct) From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) On 13/01/16 05:33, Zeev Suraski wrote: > It's the divisive RFCs that are the key source of the contention on internals, and any solution that won't strongly discourage them is not going to solve the problem. There needs to be something built into the system that makes RFC authors not only strive for majority, but strive for consensus. I seem to recall part of the debate on requiring a simple majority was that a consensus SHOULD be achieved before opening voting, and the need for a 2/3rds majority was to help that. The reality is that there are some areas such as STD and Exceptions where there is still not a consensus that this is the right way to take PHP and while both have made progress in PHP7 and have to be lived with, they are not the natural progression for a large group of users. It will be interesting to see if STD comes into general use or is always switched off, but the replacement of error_return style of programming with exception only style is more of a hot potato still? Killing '@' seems to be a slippery slop to having to get away from error_return style altogether? The lack of a general acceptable direction seems to be what is missing? But I still don't recognise 'threatening behaviour' as a problem in any of these debates ... perhaps that is just me being think skinned ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk