> On 22 ביול 2014, at 19:25, Rowan Collins <rowan.coll...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Zeev Suraski wrote (on 22/07/2014): >> I think the way it's laid out right now makes sense. Let's not try to >> sweep this under the carpet - we two mutually exclusive options and we >> need to decide between them. > > How is laying out the arguments more clearly "sweeping it under the carpet"?
If I understood you correctly you seem to believe that we should aim for consensus when it's pretty clear there isn't going to be one. I can't see how shuffling the points around under topics will somehow help us create such consensus. Knowing many of the people in the two 'camps', I know that's not going to happen. I also don't think it's going to make it any clearer. In fact I think that putting these arguments into topics that go back and forth arguing for 6 and 7 will actually make it a lot messier. It's not as if you can buy into one argument for 7 and then another one for 6 - voters need to make a choice between the two options. I think people should read one case, then the other, and see which one they like better as a whole, as opposed to a debate-style approach where each topic is discussed separately. > The *outcomes* may be mutually exclusive, but the *discussion* is about > various issues, and I don't think the current RFC does a good job of > summarising those. If you think there's missing or superfluous content in either cases I think we'd all appreciate any suggestions you may have. I don't think that changing format while keeping the content will change the job the RFC does at summarizing the issues. Also, judging by the core turnout a couple of days ago I think it's clear most people are ready to vote on this. In about 15 hrs it had more votes that some other RFCs don't have after a week. Zeev -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
