On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 11:15 -0400, Sean Coates wrote:
> *BUMP*
>
> It would be really helpful if we could find consensus on this… I feel like
> the RFC process is stalled until these questions are answered.
I'm not the one who decides this. My personal opinion is that the rules
do not apply for
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> hi Sean,
>
> In any case I would do it anyway.
>
> Whether it can make it to 5.4 or not is another question and I can't
> give you an answer. But doing it anyway will finally clear this point.
> We have to re do the short array syntax as well.
hi Sean,
In any case I would do it anyway.
Whether it can make it to 5.4 or not is another question and I can't
give you an answer. But doing it anyway will finally clear this point.
We have to re do the short array syntax as well.
>From my side it will be a -1 as I really don't think having jso
*BUMP*
It would be really helpful if we could find consensus on this… I feel like the
RFC process is stalled until these questions are answered.
S
On 2011-06-27, at 9:06 PM, Sean Coates wrote:
>> The RFC was accepted.
>
> Ok; so is this "official" now, or does it need to be ratified somehow?
>
> The RFC was accepted.
Ok; so is this "official" now, or does it need to be ratified somehow?
If I clean up my RFC (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/objectarrayliterals) and put it
to vote, are these now the rules that will be followed?
Since I didn't use "[RFC]" in the original email to internals, do
Hi,
the voting for the Voting RFC is closed.
Results can be found here:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/voting/vote
The RFC was accepted.
David
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:26 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> 2011/6/23 Larry Garfield
>>> >:
>>>
I'm sure there are other projects with a vested interest whose people
don't
know C well enough to engage in most con
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:26 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> 2011/6/23 Larry Garfield
>> >:
>>
>>> I'm sure there are other projects with a vested interest whose people
>>> don't
>>>
>>> know C well enough to engage in most conversations on this frequently
>>> busy
>>> list. So... would we g
Hi!
2011/6/23 Larry Garfield:
I'm sure there are other projects with a vested interest whose people don't
know C well enough to engage in most conversations on this frequently busy
list. So... would we get a say or not? :-)
You have a say - you did that right now on the list :) However, in
2011/6/23 Larry Garfield :
> I agree that part is uncomfortably vague. To use me as an example, I've
> been on this list for a few years, post periodically but not
> super-frequently, and haven't written any C code for PHP itself. However,
> I'm one of only two people from the Drupal project I kn
2011/6/23 Larry Garfield :
> I agree that part is uncomfortably vague. To use me as an example, I've
> been on this list for a few years, post periodically but not
> super-frequently, and haven't written any C code for PHP itself. However,
> I'm one of only two people from the Drupal project I kn
I agree that part is uncomfortably vague. To use me as an example, I've
been on this list for a few years, post periodically but not
super-frequently, and haven't written any C code for PHP itself.
However, I'm one of only two people from the Drupal project I know of on
this list. While I'm
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 22:52:31 +0200, Pierre Joye wrote:
> We thought there was no need to over regulate this part.
>
> It is something like mentors, if you just come in, post a couple of
> times or daily but nobody can second you and you lead zero OSS project,
> then the chance that you can vote w
We thought there was no need to over regulate this part.
It is something like mentors, if you just come in, post a couple of
times or daily but nobody can second you and you lead zero OSS
project, then the chance that you can vote will be rather low. Your
option? Contribute! :-)
On Tue, Jun 21, 2
That really neads clearing, because if i understand correctly, I should get
ability to vote (userland developer activly reading the list and writing to
list on some maters). So the question - do i get a vote ability? :-)
21.06.2011 17:36 пользователь "Philip Olson" написал:
>
>
> On Jun 20, 2011,
On Jun 20, 2011, at 5:15 AM, David Soria Parra wrote:
> Hi Internals,
>
> we have been working on getting an rfc together on how to deal with
> votes on rfcs. We aim to provide a simple mechaism for votes while
> still maintaining freedom on how to do votes and how to work on rfcs.
>
> I want
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Alexey Shein wrote:
> 2011/6/21 Pierre Joye :
>> added a link to the vote page. It should be more clear now.
> Thank you.
>
> But why not just place doodle plugin in the bottom of the page with
> rfc? This will give some chances that people will read rfc till the
>
2011/6/21 Pierre Joye :
> added a link to the vote page. It should be more clear now.
Thank you.
But why not just place doodle plugin in the bottom of the page with
rfc? This will give some chances that people will read rfc till the
end before voting. What's the idea behind keeping 2 separate page
added a link to the vote page. It should be more clear now.
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Alexey Shein wrote:
> Hi!
> Wouldn't it be better if wiki voting mechanism would be embedded in
> the page with rfc? Under the block "Table of contents", for example.
> Just now green link "Votes are ope
Hi!
Wouldn't it be better if wiki voting mechanism would be embedded in
the page with rfc? Under the block "Table of contents", for example.
Just now green link "Votes are open" is not so noticeable, so having a
chance to vote without leaving the page would better inspire people to
take part in vot
Hi Internals,
we have been working on getting an rfc together on how to deal with
votes on rfcs. We aim to provide a simple mechaism for votes while
still maintaining freedom on how to do votes and how to work on rfcs.
I want to move forward on the voting and release RFCs, so we can move
forward
21 matches
Mail list logo
