Also imo the reason why people write now (and not in the discussion
phase) because for some time in the voting there wasn't the 2/3 majority
for the 7.4 (so no sense to clutter the list) and now in the end only 1-2
votes make the difference.
At least for me, this definitely was the case. When I voted, it was
nowhere near clearing the 2/3 threshold.
As I said numerous times in the past, I'm a firm believer that
controversial RFCs (ones that generate a lot of votes with a substantial
number of opposers) should not pass. I think this is important when adding
features - but it's actually a lot more important with deprecations. When
there's substantial doubt whether a deprecation should go through or not,
there should be no doubt at all - it shouldn't. This is one of the
clearest cases if not the clearest one we've had to date.
Process wise we're in a bit of an unchartered territory here, but I don't
think we should let the headache involved with figuring out how to reverse
this decision force us to impose this on our users. It's better to go
through this unpleasantry now than deal with the backlash later.
George, please consider reopening the vote for an extra week. That is
probably the simplest way to move forward from a process standpoint.