Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:106902
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2019 12:55:04 +0100
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <f9a3a00b-da81-4028-9be9-3366fd4922eb@Spark>
References: <CAF+90c8EvfFPqjRJjJ3T-qTfLiWn7aZzCrGpk7R3yNFLT1qWjQ@mail.gmail.com> <1686643.PblvKQRnJp@mcmic-probook> <190b7291-812e-4337-bd09-950dc30c655a@Spark> <2157489.0uZv62oTo4@mcmic-probook> <CAF+90c8cBwXrdmfpBz6=Kt3ZM+X5fmVU+S+Op0JNhSEQ-GT4jQ@mail.gmail.com> <f9a3a00b-da81-4028-9be9-3366fd4922eb@Spark>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To: internals@lists.php.net
Message-ID: <DCA928BE-1B9C-49DF-A314-5226A035B245@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Union Types v2 (followup on github usage)
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Tommins)

On 8 September 2019 11:42:07 BST, Brent <brendt@stitcher=2Eio> wrote:
>=C2=A0- We could add community guidelines, clearly stating that RFC comme=
nts
>should stay on topic
>=C2=A0- People could be appointed to moderate the comments, allowing
>contributors to focus on the code instead of community management
>=C2=A0- Conversations on GitHub can be locked as a last measurement=2E
>Repository members can still comment=2E
>
>I fear that separating the main discussion from the PR will cause
>unnecessary confusion: important, generals remarks could be made on the
>"main thread", and I think there's value in keeping these remarks
>together with everything else=2E


I'm sceptical of that as a solution for two reasons:

Firstly, the conversations weren't necessarily wrong, they were just a sli=
ght drift of topic=2E The problem is not removing them from the PR, it's en=
couraging them to move somewhere else=2E I fear that saying "sign up to the=
 mailing list and repeat that point in a completely different format" will =
be taken up less than "make a new thread on this same list/forum"=2E =20

Secondly, the problem is partly a technical one: GitHub PRs have very poor=
 support for replies and sub-threads, so even on-topic discussions that don=
't relate to a specific part of the text are hard to follow=2E

I think Nikita's suggestion is a good one: use a PR for making targeted su=
ggestions to the RFC text itself, but raise the general points on the main =
list=2E That might even include saying "I've added a handful of suggestions=
 relating to X" and discussing the wider issue that links them=2E

I agree it would be interesting to experiment further, and I think this hy=
brid approach would be a good one to try next=2E

Regards,

--=20
Rowan Tommins
[IMSoP]