Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:85394 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 36352 invoked from network); 22 Mar 2015 07:05:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 22 Mar 2015 07:05:35 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=pierre.php@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=pierre.php@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.192.49 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: pierre.php@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.192.49 mail-qg0-f49.google.com Received: from [209.85.192.49] ([209.85.192.49:36382] helo=mail-qg0-f49.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id D6/C3-00828-FB96E055 for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2015 02:05:35 -0500 Received: by qgez102 with SMTP id z102so35200019qge.3 for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2015 00:05:32 -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; bh=7LDX9wF1iVPmOAa9Yg6Vv9L3Se+p2PQhTCSviOsoZbY=; b=rcvjeuHiG70HybK46W2/jG9jawzSQ+uN2eJlNnM9n+nE08fOylJFvuio9KRacYYv6Y 8DWAPz6F2X+vdeJwSpUTFe2Fy8ShEwlZsFV938afispyj1EP6D2U5/n9Dz62GA5fI65l qVOa532fz7m05beWwp3stWJWDLMOHKPuSwixtoecvAZpp97Y9NuzGV5J7vcsQac09iZ6 WCmBRuPBknEnJtNPi6tBqGnWpkpnJHNrlozMsiNHJCLB6imsqSXqAmtUcos+MGMMwwcd dteP+h14CM9+EcO88vsjevBw4yc2Hg504Oh3fj/xIAMoWGcEKCMrIBRFAe0BeKKs1HuJ Fx5g== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.133.67 with SMTP id 64mr78067149qhf.17.1427007932851; Sun, 22 Mar 2015 00:05:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.96.39.195 with HTTP; Sun, 22 Mar 2015 00:05:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.96.39.195 with HTTP; Sun, 22 Mar 2015 00:05:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2015 18:05:31 +1100 Message-ID: To: Patrick Schaaf Cc: PHP internals , Peter Cowburn , Leigh Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1136fdceedec0d0511db2c0c Subject: =?UTF-8?B?UmU6IFtQSFAtREVWXSBUbyBSRkMgb3IgTm90IFRvIFJGQyBbd2FzIFJlOiBbUEhQLURFVg==?= =?UTF-8?B?XSDlm57lpI3vvJogW1JGQ11bRElTQ1VTU0lPTl0gQWRkIHByZWdfcmVwbGFjZV9jYWxsYmFja19hcnJh?= =?UTF-8?B?eSBmdW5jdGlvbl0=?= From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye) --001a1136fdceedec0d0511db2c0c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Mar 22, 2015 2:01 PM, "Patrick Schaaf" wrote: > > Am 22.03.2015 02:30 schrieb "Leigh" : > > > > Yep, this does look like another case of simply ignoring rules. The fact > > that what does and does not require an RFC does not help, this probably > > didn't need one, however one was created and the rules need to be stuck > to. > > Hmm. Is that really the line to be drawn? An RFC, by itself, provides a > good point to spell out a change clearly, and anchor it for reference in > discussion. Discussion on internals itself cannot provide that, it is too > scattered, and POC code provides it at the code layer only. Thinking about > documentation, for example. > > So, maybe the line is better drawn at what needs a vote, and what does not? > > Just an idea: as soon as an RFC goes up / leaves draft state, could it have > a "needs a vote?" prevoting section? And if a certain minimum opts for > "needs a vote" (within a minimum discussion period after leaving draft), > one must be held? (thinking about a one week period and three or five > needs-a-vote calls, or something similar) I would not say it better :) RFC, even for small things streamline everything and make it easy to get the idea and write docs. However the main problem here is to ask on Friday and apply on Saturday. --001a1136fdceedec0d0511db2c0c--