Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:65232
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.217.175 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5ed6711b24349c82b7c17dd450ff7c80@mail.gmail.com>
References: <76a9565b2a095a72063a68f106a6b457@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEZPtU5=_=FP6wRQjyot0qhAZ0+hrhjdARCjNpcvv4Ne8R8KgA@mail.gmail.com>
	<5ed6711b24349c82b7c17dd450ff7c80@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 12:07:19 +0100
Message-ID: <CAEZPtU57p+snxR=LK3j4uSKPMvfU99R68gRRqQsna1MNuadojA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Voting periods
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye)

hi,

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> wrote:
>> > My suggestion is for voting periods to be limited to one week,
>> > regardless of the topic.  It should be more than enough.  Regardless,
> an 'open
>> ended'
>> > voting period is unacceptable IMHO.
>>
>> You were one of the person who requested to have at least two weeks, so
>> nobody can miss a vote due to various reasons (on the road, off time, or
>> whatever else). I'd to keep two weeks.
>
> Well the way it is right now it's a 'one week by default', unless there
> are reasons to extend it, which IIRC was the compromise.  I find it
> difficult to believe that had this particular RFC been in an 'accepted'
> position back on Wednesday the 23rd, the vote wouldn't have immediately
> closed...

I find somehow disturbing that you raised that for the RFC you don't
like, that has to be said :) You also, if I am not mistaken, changed
your vote during the week. That's all good, but changing rules to get
the results we wish is not going to happen.

> In my opinion - based on our actual experience now as opposed to
> theoretical predictions which we had back then - one week should be enough
> as the default.  But I'm fine going with two weeks.  I guess we'll vote on
> that too :)  It's more important to have a definite end date than whether
> it's one week or two weeks.

One week is too short, I'd to go with two weeks minumum, end date must
be set when a vote begins, to avoid any confusions.

I will add a vote on that in the voting RFC, as un update, so we will
a clear(er) position for the next RFCs.

Cheers,
--
Pierre

@pierrejoye