Re: [VOTE] [Bylaw Amendment] Do not require interface suffix on future PSR Interfaces

-1 Symfony On 9/4/16 09:26, Michael Cullum wrote: Hi all, The PSR-11 Editors have requested we open this vote for them as they are unable to do so not being voting members. *Status Quo:* The bylaw states that all interfaces in PSRs published by the PHP FIG must have the interface name suffix

Re: [VOTE] [Bylaw Amendment] Do not require interface suffix on future PSR Interfaces

-1 SilverStripe On Monday, 5 September 2016 04:26:50 UTC+12, Michael Cullum wrote: > > Hi all, > > The PSR-11 Editors have requested we open this vote for them as they are > unable to do so not being voting members. > > *Status Quo:* The bylaw states that all interfaces in PSRs published by >

Re: [VOTE] [Bylaw Amendment] Do not require interface suffix on future PSR Interfaces

-1 from Sculpin. As others said, this is just change for change's sake. -Chris On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 12:26 PM, Michael Cullum wrote: > Hi all, > > The PSR-11 Editors have requested we open this vote for them as they are > unable to do so not being voting members. > >

Re: [VOTE] [Bylaw Amendment] Do not require interface suffix on future PSR Interfaces

-1 from Jackalope regards, Lukas > On 04 Sep 2016, at 18:26, Michael Cullum wrote: > > Hi all, > > The PSR-11 Editors have requested we open this vote for them as they are > unable to do so not being voting members. > > Status Quo: The bylaw states that all

Re: [VOTE] [Bylaw Amendment] Do not require interface suffix on future PSR Interfaces

-1 for Composer - this is change for the sake of change IMO, I'd rather people spent time on more productive discussions :) On 04/09/2016 18:26, Michael Cullum wrote: Hi all, The PSR-11 Editors have requested we open this vote for them as they are unable to do so not being voting members.

Re: [VOTE] [Bylaw Amendment] Do not require interface suffix on future PSR Interfaces

-1 from PEAR On Sep 4, 2016 11:26, "Michael Cullum" wrote: > Hi all, > > The PSR-11 Editors have requested we open this vote for them as they are > unable to do so not being voting members. > > *Status Quo:* The bylaw states that all interfaces in PSRs published by > the

Re: [REVIEW] PSR-13: Link definition interfaces

As a general secretarial note, the minimum 2 week review period is now complete as of the 30th August and this can be put to a vote at any time from this point onwards. -- Michael C On 1 September 2016 at 22:47, Larry Garfield wrote: > On 09/01/2016 02:34 PM, Woody Gilk

Re: [VOTE] PSR-6 Errata

Hi all, Sorry we're announcing this late. It appears the secretaries google calendar glitched and therefore neglected to notify us of the end of the vote. The quorum was set at 13 with a membership of 38. Therefore with only 11 voters (29%) the vote did not pass. Even if quorum had been