Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:77489
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain adamharvey.name designates 209.85.223.180 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: adam@adamharvey.name
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1409221231540.4267@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl>
References: <8DEFB90E-0F7F-4876-890D-D4AD1C655D87@ajf.me> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1409221231540.4267@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 14:08:51 -0700
Message-ID: <CADajX4DeX5M7pgbmzaAqER5xBMboGpBMyab0rKzrb4NcteZJHQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Derick Rethans <derick@php.net>
Cc: Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Is it fair that people with no karma can vote on RFCs?
From: aharvey@php.net (Adam Harvey)

On 22 September 2014 04:32, Derick Rethans <derick@php.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Sep 2014, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>
>> Perhaps I=E2=80=99m being unfair and overthinking things, but I wonder i=
f it
>> is really fair for people who have no karma, i.e. not contributors to
>> the documentation, extensions, php-src or anything else, to have the
>> ability to vote on RFCs?
>>
>> I=E2=80=99d never suggest people without internals karma can=E2=80=99t v=
ote. I think
>> doc and peck contributors are as valued as any other contributors.
>> However, people with no karma whatsoever (a blank people.php.net page)
>> voting irks me.
>
> I think people's votes should only count if they have karma to the
> section of the code that the RFC/feature/whatever relates to.

+1. I've said this plenty over the last couple of years, as IRC
regulars can attest to. Ultimately, people who actually know and
maintain the codebase should be making the final decisions.

Which is definitely not to say that we shouldn't be listening to
people outside the voting group =E2=80=94 obviously, we should listen, and =
get
feedback. I just don't believe that the haziness of the current
process ("we might give you a voting account if you meet mostly
undefined criteria which no two people actually agree on, which then
allows you to provide a single tick with no feedback") encourages
that, and at some point we're going to end up with a feature being
committed that is going to cause major headaches for day to day
developers.

Adam