Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:128193
Feedback-ID: i8414410d:Fastmail
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2025 09:05:54 -0500
To: "php internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
Message-ID: <7afc0ac1-3446-459a-a67a-e616afe750f6@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <b0d97beef95862524b329922522bbefe@bastelstu.be>
References: <b0d97beef95862524b329922522bbefe@bastelstu.be>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] "Abstain" voting option for RFCs
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: larry@garfieldtech.com ("Larry Garfield")

On Tue, Jul 22, 2025, at 5:03 PM, Tim D=C3=BCsterhus wrote:
> Hi
>
> Adding an "Abstain" option to RFCs was an idea that floated around=20
> multiple times in the past and it now came up again as part of (more=20
> than) one of the RFCs that recently went to vote. I've therefore final=
ly=20
> written up a policy RFC to add such an option. As part of doing that I=20
> have also cleaned up the phrasing of the corresponding section and add=
ed=20
> some clarification of what I believe matches the current policy and ju=
st=20
> wasn't written down, particularly around "secondary votes".
>
> Please find the RFC at: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/rfc_vote_abstain
> And the PR at: https://github.com/php/policies/pull/20
>
> As with all policy RFCs, the corresponding PR to the policies reposito=
ry=20
> will be the authoritative source of the proposal and the RFC (and=20
> discussion) will only provide extra context. Please do not comment on=20
> the PR (except for minor typographical or phrasing clarification=20
> suggestions). For comments regarding the actual "policy" reply to this=20
> discussion thread for proper visibility instead and I'll make sure to=20
> incorporate them as appropriate.
>
> This message is intended to begin the official discussion period. Whil=
e=20
> it would be great to bring this policy into effect before any RFCs=20
> targeting PHP 8.6, I'll make sure to monitor the (list) activity with=20
> regard to folks being busy finalizing their own RFCs (and enjoying the=
ir=20
> summer vacations [1]) to make sure everyone had plenty of opportunity =
to=20
> participate in the discussion, so I would expect a vote around end of=20
> August at the earliest.
>
> Best regards
> Tim D=C3=BCsterhus
>
> [1] I'll be on vacation myself in August :-)

I support this change.  Thank you.

The only thing I'd add is that in the case of multi-option secondary vot=
es, STV/RCV also be explicitly allowed.  (Rank first, second, third, etc=
.).  (I'm aware the mechanism for STV is kinda clunky on the wiki right =
now, but we know how to make it work.)  Perhaps even encouraged if "do n=
othing" is not one of the options.

An example of both up/down and either/or secondary votes would also be h=
elpful.

--Larry Garfield