Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:107753
To: internals@lists.php.net
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2019 09:38:31 +0100
Message-ID: <4712060.ltm4qiixbZ@mcmic-probook>
Organization: FusionDirectory
User-Agent: KMail/5.2.3 (Linux/4.9.0-11-amd64; KDE/5.28.0; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <CAOwTYAu-S4P57oyOHU_h82unytx-_Og=X_Yi6wW1Euoi++Zd2Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF+90c-k6SXe9yiqbrUUgwcmz9mtfnQty5_BqxFDgcU-sWEvuA@mail.gmail.com> <CAOwTYAu-S4P57oyOHU_h82unytx-_Og=X_Yi6wW1Euoi++Zd2Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] GitHub RFC workflow
From: come.chilliet@fusiondirectory.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?C=F4me?= Chilliet)

Le samedi 2 novembre 2019, 19:40:56 CET Joe Watkins a =C3=A9crit :
> I would like to question the reasoning behind wanting to "own" the RFC
> content: We don't require any such thing for any other kind of PR although
> we say we require a patch on bugsnet, we actually don't require it. So, I
> have a hard time telling the difference between a PR for an RFC and a PR
> for a bugfix or enhancement.
>=20
> Can anyone tell the difference ?

Whether there is a difference or not, =C2=ABwe already use too much github=
=C2=BB is not a reasonable argument for =C2=ABlet=E2=80=99s use more github=
=C2=BB.
It would of course be better if the PRs were not done through github, but a=
s far as I know this is not mandatory and people are allowed to do PR throu=
gh other systems.

I=E2=80=99m still strongly against using github for RFCs, and missed most o=
f the discussion on union types because it was there and hard to follow (th=
ings are not chronological, I can=E2=80=99t know easily if there are new co=
mments and which ones are, usability is not the reason I=E2=80=99m against =
github but it was also bad).

=2D-=20
C=C3=B4me Chilliet
=46usionDirectory - https://www.fusiondirectory.org