Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:56227
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.42 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4EBB5847.50400@lerdorf.com>
References: <CAH-PCH79fgb+isqZyeZcsSjY6WWJ=ZjGY2oEMgdrjO2=eBFC8Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAF+90c_sKnS4nRpfActoUQ3OHst248X6cGp9CP=JZ2WO1wbw4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH-PCH7qN52+sEfnj3Ud0EyK=B8njNkAGfKzwaeUkDYPPGD3UA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAF+90c8WmbbdtMMau=HnMEpQ+dhJJDEQzgsTtrn9GCxqvFdZ-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EBADCE4.9030702@sugarcrm.com> <CAF+90c_rdZ4DpVgZ_hq7yYiDpXPEBaozq9Rf9GD5Kfcga2vztQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EBAF5D8.40608@sugarcrm.com> <CAFp73Xv2_CJaYvGasrvjf8rgv2=cCNoDW5fvk8UenikCjheStQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EBB5847.50400@lerdorf.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 11:53:59 -0200
Message-ID: <CAFp73XveEuDZSuHb7pz9i=s1xkwigcuqrE9OweQjDW2CjDJpZQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com>
Cc: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@googlemail.com>, 
	PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] who can vote
From: guilhermeblanco@gmail.com ("guilhermeblanco@gmail.com")

Hi Rasmus,

Comments inline.

On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 2:51 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com> wrote:
> On 11/09/2011 07:01 PM, guilhermeblanco@gmail.com wrote:
>> My short version of this entire email is very simple question. Is PHP
>> meritocracy based?
>
> It is.

I'd rather say "wort of, when interesting".

>
>> I want to highlight another RFC where I saw the before mentioned
>> meritocracy fallen into the cracks.
>> http://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortsyntaxforarrays
>
> Except that is a terrible example because that was eventually accepted.
> But yes, meritocracy means that the core developers have more say than
> userland folks and if 14 active core developers vote against something
> and 9 vote for, as per your example, then there is enough reason to not
> implement it. Or, as was the case with this feature, it just took a bit
> longer to get more core folks on board before it could be implemented.

I'll stick to "userland".
Anyone that can vote today contributes to PHP by any way. Only SVN
users can vote, so they are either contributors of doc, website, src.
I have wrongly classified the "userland" here. My mistake, but the
fact is that every single voter there must have equal voice.
I want to expand my explanation on next topic.

>
>> If PHP is a meritocracy based language, I
>> thought that everyone have equally voice over it.
>
> I think you are misunderstanding what a meritocracy means. It means
> exactly the opposite of everyone having an equal voice. The people who
> do the bulk of the work on the code have the most say over their own
> code. And that doesn't make it a hobby, that makes it an open source
> project created by volunteers.

I don't think so. You have classified that php-src have more weight in
voting because they do the biggest effort.
That's great, but you're forgetting that php-doc, php-web and php-test
do have a lot of effort too.
The fact when it comes to touch the php-src, no matter what you do, if
you're not part of php-src, your vote doesn't have the same weight.
This means clearly to me that meritocracy is applied correctly until
the SVN karma, but after that, only php-src are listened. That's what
the short array syntax describes.

>
> From your example of the short syntax for arrays. If you check the
> original voting, I voted for the feature. If this was a dictatorship and
> not a meritocracy then I would have just pushed ahead and implemented
> the feature, but with 14 high-merit votes against it I obviously
> couldn't do that.

And I'm not criticizing you individually. I'm questioning core as a
whole. You're part of it, but your ideas may be different from others.
I respect you a lot and I really appreciate all the effort you put
into the language. But still, there're hundreds of other people who
also put it too, either contributing in spreading PHP, helping docs,
maintaining the website, etc. Would you still consider them that their
vote weight is different?

>
> So yes, the conclusion stands. If a majority of core developers are
> against a feature, it really doesn't matter how many userland people
> want something. Core people don't vote against things for the fun of it.
> They tend to have legitimate concerns. You may not agree with those
> concerns, but that doesn't mean they aren't real and they are coming
> from the perspective of someone who has a lot more experience than other
> voters for a feature. Now, the way to change that dynamic is for more
> people to become involved and help with the core of the language. Help
> with fixing bugs, fixing test cases, reviewing bug reports and through
> this effort become core contributors who can then vote the next time the
> feature is brought up and push it through at that point.

Still... the userland is still people with SVN access.
I tend to agree that short array syntax is cool, but if the patch is a
can of worms, then it's fine to revert it. But it's something I spoke
with Andi other day... if it opens so many issues in the language,
then the engine is starting to reach its own limitations.
I saw that PHP had complete rewrite of its engine happened after 5
years... it's been exactly 5 years since last rewrite and it seems
some of the RFC are already requiring changes in the engine. Don't you
think it's time to consider it again?

>
> -Rasmus
>



--=20
Guilherme Blanco
Mobile: +55 (11) 8118-4422
MSN: guilhermeblanco@hotmail.com
S=C3=A3o Paulo - SP/Brazil