Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90799 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 80153 invoked from network); 21 Jan 2016 16:52:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 21 Jan 2016 16:52:45 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=danack@basereality.com; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=danack@basereality.com; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain basereality.com from 209.85.160.179 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: danack@basereality.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.160.179 mail-yk0-f179.google.com Received: from [209.85.160.179] ([209.85.160.179:34614] helo=mail-yk0-f179.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 07/5E-09073-CDC01A65 for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 11:52:45 -0500 Received: by mail-yk0-f179.google.com with SMTP id a85so55077449ykb.1 for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 08:52:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=basereality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=VoXnfkPviO3/4ioTIODuovJMHrQfs//XYVZk2x75odM=; b=qNzE/NSp23dUf+bMNiqboL8vxwXuHQmnNKmbtBMRwh3iECyQ8UNmY8EDZAur9JMW9s TH3B5RkhtIVG4Lp/CcgjZGumpv88XoX6A2wJSIiAJhic25OFLXglHboIYuHWLxcqjeJM I7VGj3tBifTvpmMufq8r4AHV/RmkuReKgoecJ/AvW5q06NADNDmK4W88zp/pnfE5AANJ PbX9Wj/4KRdyw9bxeuvq+Y4Cxtos97CCiVpZrXT5A+4TsMF46HDLJSvAM0yS33ABzVje wKmXpsP5c5zP2quWkZBbKUhqae8fkPAishLd+AEhedJyO4LEWWs1JhVD5iYk5PNo1vGv W6cQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=VoXnfkPviO3/4ioTIODuovJMHrQfs//XYVZk2x75odM=; b=KK5dQdfE28Amv7kzTsV9tGiJIEn269ThsXyVG/VPmxnHpjJlJMvIV4QMBt2JsODStC fxc+TqIflXvDr4mhpYd0Myjqw8USX3YdMve266g2sj0wAaBAv9bIxT4W2wzuuI0V+0Br nUf+1NEpir5WsY1ogrV2KsHptkhLIwEFOGTFmD8waH2cF4ARDzKQP3mxqqj5j/zx84f3 CYdQGgIl7rSLqOZ2zDYuPyRs018i0xn1cs/LOY3Iyxv+UMbDS2ooaOQQm/OzV93AMGKb lKXLexb8oUVdgmkOg/A5BvaTfC4Fft8deihXziq0QSvG2359hSAx7gxVsIeF4IVCCuUn oknA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnVJGF8E0bJnrcbTJPgqtnxxqEmQLTKi4KB+0TyPmp75pm9jXqS2V+AR4v3A4EjqzwW96YlTm1g7dXL3haKdZL1rYXhyQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.37.39.215 with SMTP id n206mr14528648ybn.20.1453395162317; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 08:52:42 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.37.83.131 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 08:52:42 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [2.96.86.149] In-Reply-To: References: <43.8B.22511.75120A65@pb1.pair.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 16:52:42 +0000 Message-ID: To: Zeev Suraski Cc: Andrea Faulds , "internals@lists.php.net" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Re-proposed] Adopt Code of Conduct From: danack@basereality.com (Dan Ackroyd) On 21 January 2016 at 07:06, Zeev Suraski wrote: > We have clear rules which disallow revival of RFCs which failed a vote for a duration of six months, unless they're very substantially modified, so revival isn't always allowed in open source. As other people have noted, the RFC never went to vote, so it was never rejected. But even if it had been, the actual text is you're claiming as a clear rule is: "it will not be allowed to bring up a rejected proposal up for another vote, unless...The author(s) make substantial changes to the proposal." There is absolutely no rule against being allowed to discuss something. The only rule is about putting stuff to a vote repeatedly. aka please don't try to shut down conversations you don't like. cheers Dan