Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:83191
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 209.85.213.182 as permitted sender)
References: <CAAyV7nHHBxSPemoF0Gj+ridov99WFLMh-+nxDwBY5ikJwV0OUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<a25095424ba7a260f9a149a5711afa61@mail.gmail.com> <CAEZPtU4GxwmU8ob1O-h1LuV=ytetvw9JoZT-t+R67ZrFtMXCxw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAEZPtU4GxwmU8ob1O-h1LuV=ytetvw9JoZT-t+R67ZrFtMXCxw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Thread-Index: AQHZm35ye3NFGwIiX+/cnKgzWZqQygHSR07nAcgIyaecyJXeoA==
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 16:33:59 +0200
Message-ID: <d5727e3a60c13bfad525df16948e9634@mail.gmail.com>
To: Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Using Other Channels (was Scalar Type Declarations v0.5)
From: zeev@zend.com (Zeev Suraski)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pierre Joye [mailto:pierre.php@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 4:09 PM
> To: Zeev Suraski
> Cc: Anthony Ferrara; PHP internals
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Using Other Channels (was Scalar Type Declarations
> v0.5)
>
> We have seen off list discussions or pressures many times in the pasts. I
> have
> (other too but I can only talk for myself) been said an insane amount of
> times
> to stop private discussions, for anything related to php core. There is no
> exception to this rule. I repeat:
> There is NO exception to this rule.

I disagree.  Completely.

I think 1:1 or group discussions are completely legitimate, and they're not
only legitimate - they can be very productive.

There's a huge gap between making decisions in closed groups, or doing 'arm
bending' - and private discussions, which I repeat, are completely
legitimate.
Private discussions happen all the time, in countless mediums.  Conferences,
emails, IRC (public in theory, private in practice), Twitter DMs and more.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with discussing an idea directly with one
or more people before bugging thousands of people with it.  They'd all be
better served if the idea presented to them already had a slightly more than
just one person standing behind it (which is an inherent side effect of
barring private discussions as you suggest), and had some of the initial
issues weeded out.  Now, if such ideas are presented as a final dictation
with no opportunity to discuss them - that's is in fact problematic,
although ultimately, there's always the bar of the vote.  Regardless, this
isn't the case here.

Zeev