Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:56236 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 20857 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2011 16:40:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 10 Nov 2011 16:40:51 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=rasmus@lerdorf.com; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=rasmus@lerdorf.com; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lerdorf.com from 209.85.213.42 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: rasmus@lerdorf.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.213.42 mail-yw0-f42.google.com Received: from [209.85.213.42] ([209.85.213.42:59947] helo=mail-yw0-f42.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id BC/79-01205-09EFBBE4 for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 11:40:51 -0500 Received: by ywm19 with SMTP id 19so1590714ywm.29 for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 08:40:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.68.35.103 with SMTP id g7mr14427922pbj.53.1320943245794; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 08:40:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.200.5] (c-50-131-44-225.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [50.131.44.225]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id km16sm22667305pbb.9.2011.11.10.08.40.44 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 10 Nov 2011 08:40:44 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4EBBFE8B.40308@lerdorf.com> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 08:40:43 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "guilhermeblanco@gmail.com" CC: PHP Internals References: <4EBADCE4.9030702@sugarcrm.com> <4EBAF5D8.40608@sugarcrm.com> <4EBB5847.50400@lerdorf.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4a1pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] who can vote From: rasmus@lerdorf.com (Rasmus Lerdorf) On 11/10/2011 05:53 AM, guilhermeblanco@gmail.com wrote: > 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. If there is voting on an RFC related to php-doc stuff, then the meritocracy shifts to the main php-doc contributors. Same goes for testing-related issues. My vote on a doc issue carries considerable less weight than my vote on a src issue. Call it a consensus-based meritocracy, if you will. The idea here is that it isn't sustainable for the voting process to create a decision that a large number of the people doing the day-to-day work on a given part of the project disagree with. In a volunteer organization that simply doesn't work because the volunteers will naturally just stop volunteering if they are forced to work this way. > 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? Sure, but this is another great example. If you wrote an RFC that basically said, "Let's rewrite the engine" I bet it would get a lot of positive votes. But then what? Rewriting the engine is a multi-year effort by at least a couple of really strong developers. Unless the RFC is written by these developers or it includes a credible commitment by said developers to actually do the work and stick around to support it, the votes are meaningless. You are kind of implying that because a bunch of people click a checkbox on the wiki site, I, or someone like me should quit our jobs and spend the next 2 years of our lives working on something you think is a good idea. Things just don't work like that. -Rasmus