Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:115898 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 68660 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2021 15:08:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 30 Aug 2021 15:08:21 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73E3D18053D for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2021 08:43:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-vs1-f49.google.com (mail-vs1-f49.google.com [209.85.217.49]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2021 08:43:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vs1-f49.google.com with SMTP id m19so10850039vsj.10 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2021 08:43:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=basereality-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=rnZ18mlzgW09+Fz1d5moNLn3uHYYZJfTiEMcRsMThI0=; b=Qgk7nqZYIgjUphnuviR8dy6GXPp+0glh0eI/+fvPvt0JnjgSyHJpMsRyiqUDo8bFrp m+YYd0ZCyslK0grSgzD1DOWrCnhyp18EJ+Um0BBZv5ewyxGHGyr/0ZB9r6kzq8UcAiF+ bF3LWwSZU3rbrE3wJKm0euc2MQ00Lkym8RFItf9wWmDHMsWW0tAYJiwiIKdmbLSTe/yj v2sF+WDHxyhR//CSgseLAyXHMQYytrp5khKn9oFhGTk/8Bp0Q+vaFh5aD4eNx/2rTFAs m619yDbVsPOH3rgoAQ0RTjVKn7AZH6v4iHMrwe0GbPkmSoF0XTJXPOGZbeWHAaJ6vs9w zbjw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=rnZ18mlzgW09+Fz1d5moNLn3uHYYZJfTiEMcRsMThI0=; b=cdpf1DInEdm19EpeBpf55cVcoKggVHpc22eFESZFnnR2hsaETGP83m5wq8N+UIqoAj N29uD+BfiQpDe34GmqTH2kdvhqias8XASNIOdc1HO2kLsAlMS8PNTXiCKgxf6trogo2a rutpPV3kjYJDRnmvOwzBuHoyOuEq4EyDt5zgvjrQK53ysHD2+8fp3c5BwaevoXnOd0vI 7j4OpjAUXN/6CvCpMCpL8EAkQTPkdaN9UdiEeGoHzklOTTP5bjy3KuK9uoR0Birx1BqB R8kOYKSb3+7rpD2XjxLBv7LtUG4XtmuDWfj+Ow32czDsCqSiziMbCVZUMoTC3G6noi7M JDiA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53359Slvq7G4wQiJMuTwnWbl4eqqfAeRqTY3nEXsNgxxmATtFbP2 xvkzhibvZQ0aB8ICRAdWUz6qEBhjgvQNzhuJouM0Hw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzao6KNxmL95cvB3ODX/YyhytNbeDcn7H6JRbQGR56xd5Dx58PQRxCyJQ0S8B1gavpZooWHrbuqz1lB7LrmbcA= X-Received: by 2002:a67:e3c6:: with SMTP id k6mr15660421vsm.49.1630338225628; Mon, 30 Aug 2021 08:43:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <48D54138-2930-4935-B979-9A9DE9B403F1@gmail.com> <828C15A4-86D3-43EE-960F-05B4EA7DEB23@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <828C15A4-86D3-43EE-960F-05B4EA7DEB23@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2021 16:43:34 +0100 Message-ID: To: Tobias Nyholm Cc: PHP internals Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Guidelines for RFC post feature-freeze From: Danack@basereality.com (Dan Ackroyd) On Fri, 27 Aug 2021 at 19:11, Tobias Nyholm wrote= : > Hey Dan. > > I see that you read what I wrote and intrepid it in the worst possible wa= y. This is also passive aggressive phrasing. You're trying to make me feel bad for pointing out how your phrasing is not conducive to a pleasant productive conversation. > I called it an =E2=80=9Cobvious mistake=E2=80=9D because it was clear to = me that we missed something. 'We' didn't miss it. You might have, but multiple people have explained multiple times that it was a deliberate choice to limit the scope of work for one RFC. If you had written "I consider it a mistake" that leaves room for other people to have a different opinion. But you have kept writing things like "Just because it was intentional, does not make it less of a mistake." which is dismissive of other people's point of view. > I think there are over 1000 people with =E2=80=9Cvoting powers=E2=80=9D. = I assume > you trust a majority of them to have this =E2=80=9Cdeep enough understand= ing of PHP core=E2=80=9D. Well. Most of the time people will only vote if they feel they understand the subject being discussed, and have enough confidence that voting a particular way is the right choice. That's quite different from trying to make someone _have_ to say yes or no. But there is at least one RFC that, in my opinion, there were a lot of people who voted who did not fully understand the technical details, or the implications for on-going maintenance: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/jit > If you don=E2=80=99t trust the release managers to manage the release, Ben is right, I didn't say that. I was responding to your sentence which was "what to include and not to include in a release.". > then I suggest you should improve the way we select new release managers. 'Volunteering' other people to do work is also a passive aggressive way of phrasing things. You're the person who is apparently unhappy with the current process that has been used for over a decade. If you want it changed, you do the work to change it. > This is the the extended power I would like the RMs (as a group) to have. That is also volunteering other people for more work. IMO the position of RM is already stressful enough, to the extent that I will never volunteer to be one, as it would cause me to have a nervous breakdown. Making it so that they also have to be arbiters of which post feature freeze RFCs are 'valid' or not would be an extra, and stressful, burden for them to carry. Pierre Joye wrote: > > https://github.com/php/php-src/blob/master/docs/mailinglist-rules.md Well, as the mailing rules have been linked, I might as well quote this bit= : "Do not top post. Place your answer underneath anyone you wish to quote and remove any previous comment that is not relevant to your post." sincerely Dan Ack