Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90496
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.47 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5693BB43.5020103@eliw.com>
References: <5690BCE6.6010908@gmail.com>
	<A1.30.14657.27961965@pb1.pair.com>
	<569182FD.6070404@gmail.com>
	<C1.11.14657.EC381965@pb1.pair.com>
	<5693BB43.5020103@eliw.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 15:51:52 +0100
Message-ID: <CAH-PCH7ZAH4_0Do9gaK4uS5rDzDK=yBjyhMq=t+CV5T3fDmpdg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eli <eli@eliw.com>
Cc: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114242a4d0cad305291013c5
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Anonymous voting on wiki
From: tyra3l@gmail.com (Ferenc Kovacs)

--001a114242a4d0cad305291013c5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Eli <eli@eliw.com> wrote:

> On 1/9/16 5:03 PM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
> > Hi Stas,
> >
> > Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >>> This seems useful. I do wonder whether we should use by default for
> >>> RFCs. It's interesting to see how different people vote, and knowing
> >>> who
> >>
> >> I think we talked about it, and decided not to do it. Anything changed=
?
> >
> > Actually, I don't think so. My fear was probably unfounded.
>
> Has this discussion happened since the STH votes happened?  I know it's
> been discussed before, but it seems that the STH vote kinda brought this
> out of the woodwork a bit.  And honestly I haven't seen a serious
> discussion about 'by default anonymous' since that time.  (But perhaps I
> missed it)
>
> Eli
>

Not sure which discussion you are referring(probably where were the
anonymous voting brought up again since the STH votes), but this pull
request was created because in the Code of Conduct thread somebody
mentioned that having anonymous votes can be useful when dealing with code
of conduct sanctions:
https://www.mail-archive.com/internals@lists.php.net/msg82537.html
where it was mentioned that previously we had hidden votes for a short
while but people complained and we reverted it:
https://www.mail-archive.com/internals@lists.php.net/msg82549.html
so Stas replied that he will be looking into porting the old patch:
https://www.mail-archive.com/internals@lists.php.net/msg82651.html
and here we are now, afaik the current PR from Stas introduces the
anonymous votes as an optional vote type which is less
intrusive/controversial than the last one, so we could merge it without
having any visible effects.
personally I wouldn't merge until we decided if we need/want the anon
votes, be that for regular RFCs (in which case I would only support the
inclusion if closing the vote makes visible who voted what) or for some
other new type of voting.

--=20
Ferenc Kov=C3=A1cs
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu

--001a114242a4d0cad305291013c5--