Pierre, I'm happy that we agree pretty much completely about the clarifications & updates needed for the RFC.
I do however want to point out that the problematic way the short array syntax RFC was executed was the key reason that made me feel these updates were in fact necessary - I don't think that the way it was done was exemplary in any way... Pretty much each and every point in my email is based on things that I felt went wrong with how we handled the short array syntax RFC: - There wasn't sufficient time, or nearly any time at all - between when Brian pulled it off the attic, and when a vote was called. If my proposal is accepted, there'll have to be at least two weeks between when a clearly marked [RFC] email hits internals@, and when a vote is called. - There wasn't a clearly marked, separate [VOTE] email. - There wasn't a clear or easy way of voting. - No voting period was announced, instead, people were told to stop mess around and go vote. - The author of the RFC wasn't actively involved in the whole process (as far as I could tell); There was no official replacement proposer. I just want to make sure we're on the same page. If you feel that the array syntax RFC was 'done right' then we have a bit of a gap :) In my opinion, given the lacking process, the short array syntax RFC needs to be redone. I'd still like to hear from others what they think about my proposal. I'd like to update the Release Process RFC with these suggestions if people like them. Zeev -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
