Re: [RFC] [VOTE] Libsodium as a core extension in PHP 7.2
| From: | Nikita Popov | Date: | Sat, 04 Feb 2017 00:04:32 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] [VOTE] Libsodium as a core extension in PHP 7.2 | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-98158@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 12:54 AM, Scott Arciszewski <scott@paragonie.com>
wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net> wrote:
>
> > Hi Scott and all,
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 5:44 AM, Scott Arciszewski <scott@paragonie.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I've opened the vote for the libsodium RFC.
> >>
> >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/libsodium
> >>
> >> See https://externals.io/thread/626 for the previous
> >> discussion topics..
> >>
> >> The vote closes at 21:00 UTC (4 PM Eastern Time) next Friday.
> >>
> >
> > I voted for "No, sodium_foo" syntax in order to be consistent with
> > existing procedural APIs.
> > 2/3 majority wouldn't fit nicely. What it would be if vote result is 51%
> > vs 49%?
> > More than half is good enough for 2nd vote choice. IMO.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > --
> > Yasuo Ohgaki
> > yohgaki@ohgaki.net
> >
> >
> I like \Sodium\foo instead of sodium_foo, but it deviates from the norm.
> If we're going to break the norm, we should do so on a stronger majority
> than 50%+1.
>
> Also, I thought the rules changed so *_everything_* needed 2/3 now?
>
The usual rule is that "secondary" votes use 50% majority, to avoid bias in
one direction or the other.
Regards,
Nikita