On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Stanislav Malyshev
<smalys...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> There's nothing that prevents us from reneging on that by another
>> vote. If it's a bad decision backed by logical arguments then we can
>
> That's a pretty big if, given that your only argument - that it is a BC
> break - is incorrect, as in fact the set of exceptions caught before and
> after change is exactly the same, and the only difference is that in the
> new code, you can *also* catch errors, the option that you didn't have
> before. Absent that argument, there's no reason to renege.
>
>> overturn it. Also note that *barely* passes at 67%. That is hardly a
>> landslide conclusion.
>
> We're going the dangerous road here. I agree that decision taken can be
> overridden if we find out it was bad decision, and that can - and
> eventually will - happen. However, re-opening decision immediately after
> it was agreed, without any new facts or anything changes, leads to much
> worse outcomes, as with this pattern we will never be able to decide
> anything as long as there is at least some small set of people that
> disagree. Voting is a means of establishing common goals while having
> disagreements, and a means of moving the project forward without being
> blocked by each disagreement. I say this as somebody who lost my share
> of votes and still disagreeing with some decisions taken, but re-opening
> them immediately after taking them is worse.

The key is that I feel like the voting body wasn't well informed. It's
not because I lost; rather it's because I feel like the people voting
yes didn't actually understand the issues at play. There is a big
difference between that and revoting after a vote didn't go my way as
an effort to try again.

-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to