Re: [RFC] [VOTE] Deprecate PHP's short open tags, again
| From: | Chase Peeler | Date: | Tue, 06 Aug 2019 17:25:17 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] [VOTE] Deprecate PHP's short open tags, again | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-106395@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 1:19 PM G. P. B. <george.banyard@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 at 19:12, Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 at 17:59, Chase Peeler <chasepeeler@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I'm not a voter, but, I have a question. If this fails, does that mean
>> the
>> > original RFC that passed is still in effect?
>> >
>>
>>
>> Yes, this is really ambiguous, and risks the situation being even more
>> confusing than it was before.
>>
>> The "No" column on this RFC already includes people who voted "Yes" on
>> the
>> previous version; is this an indication that they have changed their mind
>> about removing short tags, or that they prefer the original proposal?
>>
>> I think we urgently need to clarify this, and may need to reset the vote
>> with one or more clearer questions.
>>
>> Regards,
>> --
>> Rowan Collins
>> [IMSoP]
>
>
> This RFC supersedes the previous one as stated in the the RFC itself : "
> This RFC supersedes the previous one and proposes a different deprecation
> approach." meaning that the previous one is void.
> I don't know why this is ambiguous and needs to be said once again.
>
> Just to clarify - the existence of this RFC effectively means the original
never existed.
> Best regards
>
> George P. Banyard
>
--
Chase Peeler
chasepeeler@gmail.com