Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:104155
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <03f401d4b96b$18b9dc60$4a2d9520$@php.net> <CA+kxMuTpM=kfLFUtxRY57eWT3N6jx2A9m7MumbSDj=OPuXcdAA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJHtznyqZOribu8iyat0i6kQdyyoFEf_jy0GgRy2cH3GWMB4xg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+kxMuRdYkACvRFKes9v95MLhR1dwOFwpYUuBFfFARHq5_BUyA@mail.gmail.com>
 <092c01d4bce3$d8e82e80$8ab88b80$@php.net> <CAPhkiZxSfiSsBF4=O+PeJoKmYXj7RDQYfMAqcnoihzj9vge_vg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPhkiZxSfiSsBF4=O+PeJoKmYXj7RDQYfMAqcnoihzj9vge_vg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 19:32:37 -0800
Message-ID: <CAKOpQSw4uSY750PrGtmYvRY7_JKQErj5TvO=R41GFNE8TTZNfw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrey Andreev <narf@devilix.net>
Cc: Zeev Suraski <zeev@php.net>, Dan Ackroyd <danack@basereality.com>, 
	PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000987cce05811d43d1"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: RFC Workflow & Voting (2019 update)
From: kris.craig@gmail.com (Kris Craig)

--000000000000987cce05811d43d1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Mon, Feb 4, 2019, 7:18 PM Andrey Andreev <narf@devilix.net wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I was avoiding this, but since the discussion has already turned into
> all about who gets to vote, I might as well ...
>
> On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 1:46 AM Zeev Suraski <zeev@php.net> wrote:
> > the barrier to obtaining a vote is ridiculously low.
>
> You keep saying that, but it hasn't been explained how it is so.
>
> Is it the PEAR-only contributors that you want to eliminate? The doc &
> translations teams? Old-timers who are no longer interested in the
> project? Is there a common occurrence of existing leaders granting VCS
> accounts to friends for no reason?
> I mean, if you want to reduce thousands to sub-200, you might as well
> put down all your cards.
>
> Aside from a couple of past cases where "ghost" voters were mobilized
> for a huge, controversial RFCs, I haven't seen a problem with the
> current voting pool members (and thus see little reason to attempt to
> change it), but I also think it's sensible that e.g. translating a
> couple of lines in the docs isn't enough. In any case however, the
> criteria and metrics that you've chosen are, to me, quite arbitrary
> and only appear fair while not actually being so, especially the 25
> commit count.
>
> Full disclosure - that last one is what disqualifies me. Although, I
> certainly don't consider myself a "core" developer, so if your
> intention is to limit voting power to only that group I guess it has
> achieved the goal in my case.
> On the other hand, I qualify under all the current status-quo criteria
> - I've contributed some code, features, tests, docs; had a couple of
> RFCs; am a lead framework developer; participate somewhat regularly in
> internals discussions - yet obtaining voting privilege wasn't as easy
> as a "ridiculously low bar" would make you believe.
>
> Anyone who has ever attempted to use such metrics for evaluation would
> tell you that commit count is a horrible one. It makes no difference
> between 25 and 25k lines, quality or significance.
> It doesn't give any weight to participation in discussions either,
> whether its on this list or code reviews, both of which I believe are
> influential and valuable.
> Some squash commits, some don't; I've had my own commits squashed AND
> authored by the person who merged them, meaning my name isn't attached
> to them at all. This is an example of a previously meaningless factor
> all of a sudden becoming a deciding one.
> There are some well-known names that don't make the cut in Appendix A
> and that does raise an eyebrow.
>
> If you want to say that there are people with voting privileges that
> haven't earned them, that's one thing, but (and I'm not assuming bad
> intentions with this) as it stands it looks like you just wanted to
> cut as much as possible and only looked for a metric that wasn't going
> to eliminate the very top contributors, whom you can't afford to lose.
>
> Cheers,
> Andrey.
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php


Stripping any existing contributors of our voting rights is a non-starter
for me, period.  Any changes must not be applied retroactively, as that
would just lead to all kinds of problems and severe animosity/drama.

The eligibility needs to be moved to its own RFC and fixed so that it
doesn't overreach by trying to force out existing voters.  Otherwise you
can count me as a firm "no" on this one.

>
>

--000000000000987cce05811d43d1--