Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:104146
To: "'Dan Ackroyd'" <Danack@basereality.com>
Cc: "'PHP internals'" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <03f401d4b96b$18b9dc60$4a2d9520$@php.net> <CA+kxMuTpM=kfLFUtxRY57eWT3N6jx2A9m7MumbSDj=OPuXcdAA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJHtznyqZOribu8iyat0i6kQdyyoFEf_jy0GgRy2cH3GWMB4xg@mail.gmail.com> <CA+kxMuRdYkACvRFKes9v95MLhR1dwOFwpYUuBFfFARHq5_BUyA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+kxMuRdYkACvRFKes9v95MLhR1dwOFwpYUuBFfFARHq5_BUyA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 01:46:26 +0200
Message-ID: <092c01d4bce3$d8e82e80$8ab88b80$@php.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Language: he
Thread-Index: AQK3CV/q1qmjq5weXm2+stT1Y20djAGtyDgWAe3IWe4CACvtBaPezhjw
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] RFC: RFC Workflow & Voting (2019 update)
From: zeev@php.net ("Zeev Suraski")

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Ackroyd <Danack@basereality.com>
> Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2019 10:24 PM
> To: Zeev Suraski <zeev@php.net>
> Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: RFC Workflow & Voting (2019 update)
>=20
> On Sun, 3 Feb 2019 at 06:19, Zeev Suraski <zeev@php.net> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 7:14 PM Dan Ackroyd <Danack@basereality.com>
> wrote:
> >> Hi Zeev,
> >>
> >> Please can you very clearly state what problem you are trying to
> >> solve by changing the rules about who can vote.
> >
> > Fair enough, I've heard that question from several others.
>=20
> I've read all 1200 words of your reply, which is quite a few words.
>=20
> I still can't see a clear description of what problem you're trying to =
solve by
> changing who can vote.

To summarize the issues (all written in my response):

- Voting rights today are assigned in a way that isn't consistent with =
our current Voting RFC, nor that was ever intended in any point.
- Due to an unintended consequence of a Wiki implementation detail, the =
barrier to obtaining a vote is ridiculously low.
- The current system has no parallels in the world of major OS projects =
- which I do view as a problem, as I don't think we're inherently =
different from every other major OS project out there.

I realize we now have some sort of status quo that we're used to, but it =
does not mean it's a sensible status quo.

> The reason I'm being pedantic about this, is that when people just =
discuss
> possible solutions to a vague sense of "this situation isn't perfect", =
they will
> often suggest things that don't actually address the underlying =
problem. Or
> disagree about details that don't actually matter.
>=20
> We really can't have a clear conversation about what to change without =
a clear
> description of the problem that ought to be solved.
>=20
> For example, if the fundamental problem you are trying to address is =
that it's too
> difficult for people to get a vote, then I would support documenting =
what our
> current system is, and allowing people to know what they need to do to =
acquire
> a vote. If the fundamental problem the RFC is trying to address, is to =
bring in a
> whole load of new voters, who don't know how PHP works internally, =
then I
> wouldn't be as supportive.

I've been doing a horrible job at explaining myself if that's what you =
think I'm trying to do.  I'm certainly not trying to address a(n IMHO) =
non-existent problem that it's too difficult to get a vote, or getting a =
whole load of new voters.  Quite the opposite - I think we have way too =
many eligible voters today, roughly an order of magnitude greater than =
originally intended.  It's way too easy to obtain voting credentials, in =
a way that is, in my opinion, both problematic and unfair to the main =
contributors.  The goal is to go back to the original definition from =
7.5 years ago, make it clearer (there's more work to be done here), and =
then stick to it - without letting implementation details in the Wiki be =
the judge of who gets to vote.  If we do it - the voting base will =
actually shrink from around two thousand today - perhaps even slightly =
more - to around 150-200.

To put things in perspective - there was quite some backlash regarding =
providing PHP-FIG with voting rights, which is an entirely valid =
opinion.  At the same time - any person that ever contributed to PEAR =
(and consequently has a php.net account) - has immediate full voting =
rights.  The fact of the matter is that out of the ~2000 users we have =
on php.net, less than 200 actually clear the bar set in the RFC (which =
isn't particularly high - 25 commits, 500 lines of code added/changed in =
the project).  Out of those, more than a thousand haven't submitted =
anything at all to php-src, but have potentially submitted to other =
php.net projects (e.g. PEAR, or the php.net website), and an additional =
~200 have affected fewer than 10 lines in php-src.  Personally, I think =
it does tell us something about the viability of the current voting =
qualifications, and I don't think what it's telling us is positive.

Whether or not contributions to php-src should be the only criteria by =
which we admit voters is a good question.  I'm personally still =
undecided on it - whether we should find a mechanism to admit non =
php-src contributors as voters (like folks from PHP-FIG, major PHP OS =
projects, etc.), or whether we should rely on their voices being heard =
in the discussions and then represented by the php-src contribs.  What I =
personally think is clear, though, that the awkward status quo we =
currently live in needs fixing - and it's a good time to do it, as we =
discuss other elements such as voting margins and workflow.

Zeev