Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:96961 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 67968 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2016 17:33:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 17 Nov 2016 17:33:20 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=dclarke@blastwave.org; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=dclarke@blastwave.org; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain blastwave.org from 209.17.115.112 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: dclarke@blastwave.org X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.17.115.112 atl4mhob19.myregisteredsite.com Received: from [209.17.115.112] ([209.17.115.112:55746] helo=atl4mhob19.myregisteredsite.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id CA/83-05303-0E9ED285 for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 12:33:20 -0500 Received: from mailpod.hostingplatform.com ([10.30.77.36]) by atl4mhob19.myregisteredsite.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id uAHHXGrq010606 for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 12:33:16 -0500 Received: (qmail 14096 invoked by uid 0); 17 Nov 2016 17:33:16 -0000 X-TCPREMOTEIP: 99.253.103.29 X-Authenticated-UID: dclarke@blastwave.org Received: from unknown (HELO ?172.16.35.41?) (dclarke@blastwave.org@99.253.103.29) by 0 with ESMTPA; 17 Nov 2016 17:33:15 -0000 To: internals@lists.php.net References: Message-ID: <754014b7-061c-1aa3-32ff-ea4e8c9d89b8@blastwave.org> Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 12:33:15 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Abolish 50%+1 Votes From: dclarke@blastwave.org (Dennis Clarke) On 11/17/2016 12:18 PM, Joe Watkins wrote: > Afternoon internals, > > This has been discussed before in various RFC threads, there does seem to > be some consensus that 50%+1 votes could be harmful. > > To what degree, I am not sure. > > I raise for discussion the topic of abolishing 50%+1 votes, and requiring > all changes regardless of their nature to pass by a super majority of > 2/3+1. For a language tool as critical as PHP it would be better to consider a larger sample size such as 75%+1. However the merit is the issue and not the mass vote. IMHO. Dennis Clarke