Re: Re: [VOTE]Call for voting: support use list in foreach
| From: | Will Fitch | Date: | Tue, 28 Aug 2012 17:07:48 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: [VOTE]Call for voting: support use list in foreach | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-62576@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
I just noticed the RFC is listed in the Accepted category. Did something
change with the 2/3rds voting requirement? Right now, it stands at 64% Yes..
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 4:18 AM, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com> wrote:
> hi,
>
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Johannes Schlüter
> <johannes@schlueters.de> wrote:
> > On Sun, 2012-08-26 at 21:07 +0300, Yahav Gindi Bar wrote:
> >> On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Will Fitch <willfitch@php.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Maybe the simplest solution is we have a minimum participation rate
> before
> >> > voting can be closed?
> >> >
> >> Though it make sense - it's a problem, because it'll delay and reject
> some
> >> useful features because of requirements issue.
> >
> > If it is useful it should have enough supporters, else it most likely
> > isn't useful. While there should be an option to actively abstain from
> > voting.
>
> I am not sure the usefulness of this option, but it is possible to add
> a blank field ot any vote.
>
> If the idea is to say 'I do not care enough to vote yes or no' then
> simply vote no as one obviously either did not the RFC or do not want
> it.
>
> But this is off topic again in this thread, what's about creating a
> separate one if you feel like we need to refine this process?
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Pierre
>
> @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net |
> http://www.libgd.org
>