Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:91023
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.213.52 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: jakub.php@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <6F.D4.55829.C14FCA65@pb1.pair.com>
References: <6F.D4.55829.C14FCA65@pb1.pair.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2016 18:35:20 +0000
Message-ID: <CAEKnhAH1YD4Q5S15RXKSWboa1p=EUOjM8Qndp-GvP6L4jpfVHg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>
Cc: PHP internals list <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1140f582fd2fc6052a91696d
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Should we rethink the 50%+1 requirement for
 non-"language changes"?
From: bukka@php.net (Jakub Zelenka)

--001a1140f582fd2fc6052a91696d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 30 Jan 2016 17:35, "Andrea Faulds" <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> The vote on the OpenSSL AEAD RFC[1] has made me question our current RFC
process again. Under the Voting RFC[2], "Language changes" (in practice,
changes to syntax and semantics) require at least a 2/3 majority to pass
when they come to a vote, whereas changes that don't fall under that
category require a mere plurality of more Yes votes than No votes, aka
"50%+1".
>

FYI the OpenSSL AEAD RFC passed 2/3 majority so not sure why it made you
question our RFC process... :)

--001a1140f582fd2fc6052a91696d--