Re: [RFC] [INFO] Basic Scalar Types

Zeev, On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 3:07 PM, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Pádraic Brady [mailto:padraic.brady@gmail.com] >> Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2015 9:00 PM >> To: Zeev Suraski >> Cc: Bob Weinand; PHP Internals >> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [INFO] Basic Scalar Types >> >> On 15 March 2015 at 16:55, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> wrote: >> > Bob, >> > >> > Thanks for the update. This time, though, although I completely >> > respect your decision not to put your RFC into a vote unless the Dual >> > STH mode fails, I'd like to either (with your permission) take over >> > the RFC or propose my own copy and move it to voting as soon as >> > allowed. This, under a commitment that if I see that Basic STH is >> > failing to garner a clear majority, I'll retract it and move to >> > support the Dual STH RFC instead for the sake of unity. >> >> No one individual has the right to break the existing rules around voting. >> There has been more than sufficient time to date to rewrite the voting >> rules, >> debate voting rights, extend PHP7's deadline, or propose the basic RFC so >> described. A vote in contravention of the voting rules at the last >> possible >> minute cannot, by definition, be recognised at this time. I wouldn't even >> vote >> since it might lend it an air of ill deserved legitimacy, forgetting for a >> moment whether a few PEAR contributions make me any more deserving of >> a vote than others. > > No rule is being broken. > > The PHP 7 timeline RFC (wiki.php.net/rfc/php7timeline) states the following: > Line up any remaining RFCs that target PHP 7.0. | Now - Mar 15 (4+ > additional months) > > As Bob pointed out, what 'Line up' means - whether it means vote ends, vote > begins, or discussion begins - is completely open to interpretation. I > don't remember what I meant when I wrote it, but arguably, 'line up' is a > lot closer to 'start discussing' than 'finish voting', and as is typically > the case when something is unclear, the most lax interpretation is > acceptable. By your own words: http://marc.info/?l=php-internals&m=142451267910615&w=2 > Following Adam's analysis of the timeline, taking the more 'strict' (no pun > intended!) interpretation of the timeline RFC, we still have until tomorrow to start the discussion > and still target it for 7.0, no? Given the importance of this topic, I'd go for the more lax > interpretation that allows for votes to begin by March 15, giving us all a bit more time to discuss. **votes to begin by March 15**. That was the interpretation you used a month ago. Anthony