Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:88911
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain basereality.com from 209.85.160.169 cause and error)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20151021161740.GA23933@3006.local>
References: <20151020173602.GA92318@3006.local>
	<CA+kxMuSRFiM7nO0xZprzzEa7KNk8Yh8bm2xsSF0Edhhcoun50A@mail.gmail.com>
	<20151021161740.GA23933@3006.local>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 17:38:36 +0000
Message-ID: <CA+kxMuTtVZ+0Da_X1OhtFa16-jRJX4x6-8D6bvGejZiiMP9QOA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sean DuBois <sean@siobud.com>
Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [VOTE] Class Constant Visibility
From: danack@basereality.com (Dan Ackroyd)

On 21 October 2015 at 16:17, Sean DuBois <sean@siobud.com> wrote:
>
>  I will update the RFC. Who decides if/when we should restart voting?


"The PHP RFC rules is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual
rules" as there are no set decision makers or rules enforcers.

The rules set down for this scenario are, in theory, pretty clear:

> Based on the result of the votes and the discussion there are three possi=
ble outcomes:
>
> A serious issue with your RFC needs to be addressed: update the status of=
 your RFC
> page and its section on https://wiki.php.net/RFC to =E2=80=9CUnder Discus=
sion=E2=80=9D and continue
> again from step 5.

But in practice what is a 'serious issue' is not defined.

I think it is almost always right to restart a vote for anything other
than the most minor change as:

i) It avoids setting a precedent where an RFC is changed substantially
while under vote.

ii) It avoids anyone being able to complain that either what was
implemented was not what they voted for, or for people to be able to
ask that the 'missing' behaviour be implemented as a bug-fix.

And yes, in this case the RFC restarting the vote could be considered overk=
ill.

I can't see anyone actually changing their mind due to the text being
clarified, and so the result of the vote will be overwhelming support,
again. But following the rules scrupulously when the outcome is clear,
makes it harder for people to bend the rules when the outcome isn't as
clear.

cheers
Dan