Or, is the purpose of the CoC really a device to control perceptions, i.e.
protect the image of the PHP project and its citizens?
Well, that would also be a benefit. I don't think these are exclusive
goals. If PHP isn't inviting, people won't want to contribute.
What I fear is that if the c
After reviewing the proposed CoC, I wonder if its good intent might
boom-a-rang and have an opposite, chilling effect. I would respectfully
suggest re-thinking the notion of a CoC for the PHP project. Some questions
to consider:
1. Who is the CoC for, i.e. who should be its beneficiaries? U
Rather than being a bug, this matter is simply a "gotcha", one that Julien
Pauli' pointed out in his "PHP gotcha 2013" (see
https://gist.github.com/jpauli/8196145). After consulting with other
knowledgeable members of the PHP Community last year, I understand that this
is an optimization feat
From: Andrey Andreev
Sent: Sep 29, 2014 3:01 PM
To: Sharon Levy
Cc: Zeev Suraski , Derick Rethans , Andrea
Faulds , PHP internals
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Is it fair that people with no karma can vote on RFCs?
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 12:28 AM, Sharon Levy wrote:
> >> I think in all
Last, the 2nd sub-bullet of the 2nd bullet ("regular participant of
internals discussions") is especially problematic - as it basically pulls
the barrier to entry to nothing, and is the opposite of well-defined.
When
we revise the Voting RFC, it should go IMHO. Talk is cheap - the way to
get
a
Maybe the time has come for the adoption of some actual bylaws which
succintly state who merits voting privileges and who may propose an RFC. If
one reads 2.II.a of https://wiki.php.net/rfc/howto, that document indicates
that the ability to propose an RFC does not automatically confer one with
Greetings.
>>
The main problem arises from the ambiguity for $array[-1] for arrays.>>
But this is easily solvable: just introduce a slice operator.
>>
>>
$array[:-1] and the ambiguity is gone.
>That would return an array
containing the last item as the sole member, >not the last item
itsel
