Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:77501 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 44152 invoked from network); 23 Sep 2014 06:23:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 23 Sep 2014 06:23:40 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=pierre.php@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=pierre.php@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.192.43 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: pierre.php@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.192.43 mail-qg0-f43.google.com Received: from [209.85.192.43] ([209.85.192.43:60341] helo=mail-qg0-f43.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 3A/25-09206-BE111245 for ; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 02:23:40 -0400 Received: by mail-qg0-f43.google.com with SMTP id f51so4056292qge.30 for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 23:23:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=BZV4oWwtu+TcDYMofVdZCJ06tIFes3n0I+NaKJBEDJA=; b=Z8jKE8IVDoE/lcSYEUNM3Os77rgkNALOrZoHdplT+BFYR+YjE2Ao0M0DLGSgTppfQp WGbzObNJN8p5NVcFIjBe9kQ0ZuWM7nxBW18d3u9Ow7+Y3dfuFILDrl9tYBwyLbLLfwD4 B3EhXvLdKJMdXEY11ILYibFCiqBEJ2r4bHCRCtAvnl9ogFqEh3K6i7O2AE8Z2pZEF/b0 4LR/PVGSU72KiMnjbtJu4cPC18yWyWTA4SEbWgeaQzvIwFoauLb53rMNi+H32hg4i5Vv ZiXY7yXVDCLNvrhEf6vQqfnnvA5NgrKjGh/QOrQrPWEqPcQI8AQj0H9IMhAITVdmRLES KkOA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.7.130 with SMTP id d2mr29437412qad.18.1411453416394; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 23:23:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.22.51 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 23:23:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1411438877.3097.57.camel@guybrush> References: <8DEFB90E-0F7F-4876-890D-D4AD1C655D87@ajf.me> <2e56d0ee-978b-4b64-9410-b3127272c197@email.android.com> <1411438877.3097.57.camel@guybrush> Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:23:36 +0200 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?Q?Johannes_Schl=C3=BCter?= Cc: Kris Craig , Rafael Kassner , Derick Rethans , Andrey Andreev , Andrea Faulds , PHP internals 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: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye) On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 4:21 AM, Johannes Schl=C3=BCter wrote: > The approach I have in mind is going back to a consensus model by > default, allowing truly everybody to participate and giving the > opportunity to call for a vote if consensus can't be reached. It never worked in the last decade+, what makes you think it will work all of a sudden? All I see is some being afraid to loose control while all RFCs show that it is by far not the case. The active core devs did not loose control and we reached many consensuses. We have a couple of issues but the roots of them are very clear. All is all there is no reason to go back in a very bad time for php. > Given our > social diversity I however think that this hardly works out as there > always will be somebody calling for a vote ... obvious consequence would > be a quorum for calling for a vote .. wich ends up in even more > bureaucracy hell. There is no bureaucracy hell but an end to endless discussions, pressures, and other nonconstructive behaviors. The recent RFC events about starting, ending, counting are unlucky but easily fixable. Cheers, --=20 Pierre @pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org