On 13.08.20 15:17, Theodore Brown wrote:
The discussion thread you're referencing did not announce an RFC. Per the voting rules, a "Proposal is formally initiated by creating an RFC on PHP wiki and announcing it on the list". After that there must be a minimum two week discussion period before voting starts. The Shorter Attribute Syntax Change RFC failed to meet this requirement.
After reading https://wiki.php.net/rfc/howto it is stated clearly there that an RFC has to be created and be "Under Discussion" for at least two weeks. So you were actually wrong that the RFC was one day early - it was at least 8 days early, as the RFC was created and announced on the 4th of August and then put to vote on the 10th of August. It also states in this document: * Listen to the feedback, and try to answer/resolve all questions * Update your RFC to document all the issues and discussions * Cover both the positive and negative arguments Can anybody say with a straight face that this has been done in this case? Just one example: It still states in the RFC that the ending symbol is inconsistent with the language, although multiple people argued another viewpoint about this part with detailed explanations. This kind of discussion belongs in an RFC to show both sides, not just the one that suits the person writing the RFC. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
