Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:52996
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.170 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=C28H/hGian20B5yYIgR9u0SmZ4PkgYnX/qDJWa6hkSFSA+E3FOh9G4RcdY9ER8sMLg
         uA+V2GJz8LZZJlACTyvrs0NNPy8C5xTvQyVmTfMI3byaBgqsGIYcHqOwH5W1WEFBynGf
         DOSLV8I/a2F2aUXlIkE4acHKgmbYV+Aj9VfwU=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4DEC0E57.4070003@sugarcrm.com>
References: <887FE7CFF6F8DE4BB3A9535F53AFD06A4930609E@il-ex2.zend.net>
	<4DEBE420.50005@sugarcrm.com>
	<887FE7CFF6F8DE4BB3A9535F53AFD06A4930624C@il-ex2.zend.net>
	<4DEBFE9F.102@sugarcrm.com>
	<887FE7CFF6F8DE4BB3A9535F53AFD06A49306664@il-ex2.zend.net>
	<4DEC0E57.4070003@sugarcrm.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2011 02:09:23 +0200
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=pskAT__5gv2W_wQe4Zu2f=tXuoQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>
Cc: Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com>, PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Voting Process
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye)

On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 1:16 AM, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com> wrot=
e:

>> The way I see it, we can't employ the voting part of this RFC unless
>> we can agree on rules on how this voting works; =A0It's fine that we
>> don't decide exactly how we're going to do it. =A0But then, it means
>> that we don't get to do it until we do decide.
>
> Well, we'd have to vote somehow, e.g. on RFC itself :) I agree that befor=
e
> that (and including array syntax) votes were kind of haphazard and we nee=
d
> to do better. So let's have the voting process RFC. I took the liberty of
> capturing your email, with minimal edits, here:
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/voting - please edit/rewrite as you wish. I did =
not
> add anything about percentages etc. there as I have no idea how we could
> formalize it :)

I will add a reference to it in the Relase Process RFC as they are
complementary and must be resolved/adopted at the same time and before
we go with 5.4

>> What makes the most sense to me is to separate the decision making
>> process into another RFC altogether. =A0If people feel it's premature

> I don't think it's premature, quite the opposite. I just think we need to
> have agreement of release process in general (so we could start with the
> actual release process) and then work out details as they come up. The fi=
rst
> of those would be the voting RFC.

Actually I think Zeev has a good point on the voting, it has been
hurting us for too long already. I do think that waiting that these
RFCs (voting and then release process) are adopted is a must, before
any kind of new releases. Not doing that will open the pandaro box
again, think of the dead cows like 6, or the endless release phase of
5.3.

> I'm just afraid substantial changes in the release RFC mean we need to ha=
ve
> new discussion about it and take more time to do it, and in the meantime =
we
> have nothing at all, so we have to either start the release process witho=
ut
> anything at all or delay it until we figure out every last fine detail. I=
'd
> rather have general principles down and when we get to the fine details w=
e'd
> deal with them.

I think we have a consensus on this rfc already. Except the voting
process everything has been approved by most if not all active
developers already (see the proposer, for the other readers). By the
way, I'm not saying we don't need a vote, only that we are closed to
get it approved globally.

So if we need to wait one or two weeks more to sort them out, then let
do it. It will be a giant step forward and spare us many of the
painful moments we had in the past, way too often.

That being said, it is not a waste of time anyway. The discussions
about what should be in 5.4 (especially the recently proposed
features) will take a couple of weeks as well, so we can already say
that we are already in the 5.4 phase. But we did not and can't yet
begin with a 1st release, without having defined what will be in.


Cheers,
--=20
Pierre

@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org