Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:109112
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
In-Reply-To: <61BBEA2D-F215-4DD5-8753-DE7E1D5CC407@pmjones.io>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:35:29 -0400
Cc: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <90ED5916-8054-4B15-AFD2-A48DE7625064@newclarity.net>
References: <14383D05-EA33-4CD2-9648-40AA29A837A5@newclarity.net>
 <61BBEA2D-F215-4DD5-8753-DE7E1D5CC407@pmjones.io>
To: "Paul M. Jones" <pmjones@pmjones.io>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Capturing reasons for votes for historical sake?
From: mike@newclarity.net (Mike Schinkel)

> On Mar 17, 2020, at 9:11 AM, Paul M. Jones <pmjones@pmjones.io> wrote:
>=20
>=20
>=20
>> On Mar 16, 2020, at 13:29, Mike Schinkel <mike@newclarity.net> wrote:
>>=20
>> Hi all,
>>=20
>> It is a real shame that the PHP voting process has no way to capture =
a concise description of why people voted against an RFC.
> ...
>> Would it be possible to add a feature when voting were people either =
need to type in a one to two sentence reason why they voted "no" on a =
proposal OR select from the reasons that others have already given when =
voting down the specific RFC? =20
>=20
> I would be against making it a *requirement* but I sure would be happy =
to see it as an *option*.

Just curious if the "requirement" was only "you have to enter in =
something" would that still be an issue for you? =20

It is not like we could reasonably validate that they entered something =
intelligible. =20

They could just say "I don't like" and that would meet the =
"requirement."

> --=20
> Paul M. Jones
> pmjones@pmjones.io
> http://paul-m-jones.com
>=20
> Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
> https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
>=20
> Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
> https://leanpub.com/sn1php
>=20
>=20
>=20