Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:109132 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 98311 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2020 01:52:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.localdomain) (76.75.200.58) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 19 Mar 2020 01:52:12 -0000 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <14383D05-EA33-4CD2-9648-40AA29A837A5@newclarity.net> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 00:15:14 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Posted-By: 87.81.129.66 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Capturing reasons for votes for historical sake? From: marandall@php.net (Mark Randall) Message-ID: On 18/03/2020 23:22, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote: > I am not gonna personally answer a survey everytime I vote against a > feature. This is why we have a discussion period to raise issues, of > course not everyone will raise all their concerns to each and every > RFC (me included, take the annotation RFCS posted over the years, they > are awesome but the one thing I dislike is the syntax). I doubt > everyone have time to go in details and understand to the teeth what > each and every feature does. If a person doesn't have the time or inclination to read into the details of an RFC, and also doesn't have time or inclination to engage in discussion about it, and also doesn't have the time or inclination to give even the briefest of justification about why they are casting their vote a particular way to help inform future discussion... Well, they shouldn't be casting a vote in the first place. That's not to suggest everyone should need to be able to analyse the patch line by line, but if a person is cleary *that* disengaged then IMO they should do the honourable thing and refrain from voting. MR.