Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:91855
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain paragonie.com designates 209.85.218.51 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAH-PCH7Tz601+=ML+HQ4S0hG_Vi5aFZfnULY=1v4pwVTc16o7A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKws9z0ahvvd8z=Y5nSH8EmZPgA-6VMmOMsrc-SZSaPGb28Y-g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAH-PCH7Tz601+=ML+HQ4S0hG_Vi5aFZfnULY=1v4pwVTc16o7A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:09:08 -0400
Message-ID: <CAKws9z2rR9Vg-6B5FitnxEUuws4Hys9sQ61GjrkqPsE2mT03Ug@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com>
Cc: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113d35aa07905e052ea71c56
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][VOTE] Deprecate then Remove Mcrypt Closed (23-6)
From: scott@paragonie.com (Scott Arciszewski)

--001a113d35aa07905e052ea71c56
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Scott Arciszewski <scott@paragonie.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/mcrypt-viking-funeral
>>
>> The tally of closing (2016-03-22T17:00:00) is 23 Yes, 6 No. This is a
>> 79.3%
>> favorable response, which exceeds the 2/3 majority by a significant
>> margin.
>>
>> Thanks to everyone who voted or participated in this discussion.
>>
>> I've heard and respect some of the objections raised by folks who voted
>> No,
>> but moving this liability out of the core into PECL as soon as possible =
is
>> not only a good move for the security of PHP applications, but now we kn=
ow
>> it's the choice the community wants.
>>
>> As promised, I'll get the E_DEPRECATED patch written soon.
>>
>> Additionally, I will have a decrypt-only mcrypt polyfill project written
>> hopefully before 7.1.0-alpha but definitely before 7.1.0. This will allo=
w
>> people to migrate towards something better, e.g.
>> openssl_encrypt()/openssl_decrypt().
>>
>> Scott Arciszewski
>> Chief Development Officer
>> Paragon Initiative Enterprises <https://paragonie.com>
>>
>
> You ignored the voting process and my headsup mail about it, and also
> ignored most of the feedback from the replies.
>
>
> --
> Ferenc Kov=C3=A1cs
> @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
>

=E2=80=8BLet's go line by line, then?

1. Email internals@lists.php.net to measure reaction to your intended
proposal.

2. Get wiki RFC karma

Already had that.
=E2=80=8B
=E2=80=8B3. =E2=80=8BCreate the RFC

Yes, obviously, I did that. :)

4. When your RFC is ready for discussion:

* Change the status of your RFC page to =E2=80=9CUnder Discussion=E2=80=9D

Check.

* Change its section on https://wiki.php.net/RFC to =E2=80=9CUnder Discussi=
on=E2=80=9D

Totally fair to cry foul on this one; I did not do this. I wasn't aware of
this step, otherwise I would have.
* Send email to internals@lists.php.net introducing your RFC.

I did this two months ago.

5. Listen to the feedback, and try to answer/resolve all questions.

=E2=80=8BThere were no substantial questions that needed to be addressed/re=
solved.
People expressed concerns, but if we blocked every RFC because someome has
a concern that doesn't form a substantive question, would we ever get
anything done?

6. When discussion ends, and a minimum period of two weeks has passed since
you mailed internals@lists.php.net in step 4, then you can move your RFC to
=E2=80=9CVoting=E2=80=9D status.

Two months >=3D two weeks.

So really, I didn't "ignore the voting process", but I did miss a couple of
details. Pardon my novice mistake.

Scott Arciszewski
Chief Development Officer
Paragon Initiative Enterprises <https://paragonie.com/>=E2=80=8B

--001a113d35aa07905e052ea71c56--