Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:104147
To: Kalle Sommer Nielsen <kalle@php.net>,
 Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>
Cc: Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <03f401d4b96b$18b9dc60$4a2d9520$@php.net>
 <2455870.Alx54tMJ86@vulcan>
 <CAJW__o0BxHuVnMt_PkDsaD=A1C2HhzcKaYS6frRuYMRYUCJKsw@mail.gmail.com>
 <2083237.emE2DNI856@vulcan>
 <CAJW__o0ELnHtGVAeD3z-nH4ssTeSJDvo3QC5QmyFRgNR3_rgjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e22f170b-e6e6-cbea-9563-d289d7d3bd03@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 01:10:23 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAJW__o0ELnHtGVAeD3z-nH4ssTeSJDvo3QC5QmyFRgNR3_rgjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: de-DE
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: RFC Workflow & Voting (2019 update)
From: cmbecker69@gmx.de ("Christoph M. Becker")

On 04.02.2019 at 23:59, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote:

> Den søn. 3. feb. 2019 kl. 19.29 skrev Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>:
>
>> To answer both you and Sanislav here together, as he raised a similar point,
>> that presumes that 100% of the "invited outsiders" vote on every RFC.  I think
>> that is unlikely, although I freely admit I have no real data to speculate
>> either way.  Lacking any other evidence I'd say it would probably follow a
>> similar pattern to Internals day.  (If we assume a 175 person voting pool and
>> a turnout of about 50, then that's in the neighborhood of 25-30%.)
>> Truthfully, though, none of us have any idea what the total impact would be.
> 
> As a continuation of my answer above to this one; By looking at the
> average turnout of people voting as it is now, there is a 50%+ of
> people with just doc karma in one way or another (single translation),
> just PEAR or even some without any form of karma voting. Looking at
> the list of the 175 or so posted, it is a very small margin of those
> on average that votes for RFCs, meaning that adding externals to the
> top of that, that number in my original email is gonna be a lot larger
> and therefore a lot more dangerous if we open the floodgates like
> that.

In my opinion, the question “who is eligible to vote” is closely tied to
the RFC *at hand*.  For instance, str_begins() wouldn't be much of a
maintainance burden, and whether it should be included into the PHP core
could very well also be decided by some of those who won't contribute to
the implementation/maintainance.  On the other hand, whether to add JIT
compilation may better only be decided by those who would have to
maintain the implementation and who can assess related issues and
pitfalls (I'm none of those), but not by those who only can fancy “hey,
JIT is cool – let's have it!”  It's obviously hard to lay down
respective rules, though.

Anyhow, instead of suggesting some “general improvements/refinements” to
the RFC process, in my opinion, we should identify *where* exactly our
RFC process has failed, and *why* it did so.  Then we should eliminate
the bugs (if there are any).

-- 
Christoph M. Becker