> > As such I'd like to coauthor it with you and represent the case for 7. >
Andrea, I would *strongly* recommend that you accept Zeev's offer and make him a co-author. You did present at least a partial argument for breaking the convention, but I think they do have a valid grievance in that some of their arguments are being left-out. This is understandable, as you have a bias in favor of preserving the order and keeping it at PHP 6. I actually agree with you 100% on this-- but that just means that I'm biased, too. It seems only fair that someone biased on the other side should be allowed to present his arguments and I'm sure he can be trusted to keep his edits to that one section. Likewise, you can then focus on expanding the arguments for preserving the convention if you think that's necessary. And thanks for updating the required majority. "2/3 either way" just seemed too ambiguous and confusing. In the unlikely event of an exact tie, I think we'd just regard the RFC as moot and proceed as if this RFC had never been presented. I'll certainly be arguing strongly in favor of PHP 6 being the next version as I have in the past, but in the interest of fairness, Zeev should be made a co-author and given the mandate to write a section representing the arguments against PHP 6. That way, if the vote goes for PHP 6 and people want to say it's because the arguments against in the RFC weren't good enough, that'll be on him instead of you. --Kris
