Role model RFC

Hi,

I really like what Stefan did here with his traits RFC. Very solid
work, even if there are still some people not convinced if they want
this feature in, I have seen little complaints about the way this
proposal was made. Quite the contrary actually. I would like this kind
of detailed thought to become more the norm. Even if at the very
beginning of an idea this quality may not be immediately attainable,
it should be the goal. So for every idea we should have at least
someone who tries to bring the proposal to this kind of level as the
discussions progress.

For this proposal I would hope that it would be put on some host we
can trust to not disappear and be updated with the feedback. I am
still dreaming of a php.net wiki for this kind of stuff. If interested
I do of course offer wiki.pooteeweet.org to host these RFC's for the
time being. Using php.net/reST has the draw back of requiring
cvs.php.net karma for maintenance, which would be problematic for new
comers, unless we can do karma on a per file level for this?

I'd certainly be a +1 for a wide-open Wiki on php.net for this and

similar activities. It's been mentioned for quite some time, and it
seems as though - despite the fact that PHP drives the most popular
Wiki software - we're the last to adopt it. In any case, keeping it
open means that ALL people involved and with more than just a passing
interest can get involved in the C part of the RFC.

If it goes through, feel free to count me in as a volunteer to

moderate submissions, vandalism, and such.

--
</Dan>

Daniel P. Brown
Senior Unix Geek
<? while(1) { $me = $mind--; sleep(86400); } ?

Hi,

I really like what Stefan did here with his traits RFC. Very solid
work, even if there are still some people not convinced if they want
this feature in, I have seen little complaints about the way this
proposal was made. Quite the contrary actually. I would like this kind
of detailed thought to become more the norm. Even if at the very
beginning of an idea this quality may not be immediately attainable,
it should be the goal. So for every idea we should have at least
someone who tries to bring the proposal to this kind of level as the
discussions progress.

Most definitely, thanks to Stefan for this. I have rarely seen such
RFC in PHP lately. This is.. wow, from simple example to a bit more
complex and real life examples, simple texts, the reason why we need
this and a bit more about MI.

The external links to further readings on the subject are great and
the thesis is even better (A bit long but very interesting).

I think this can make a lot of good to PHP's RFC process if handled
correctly. Let's just hope we do it correctly :)

For this proposal I would hope that it would be put on some host we
can trust to not disappear and be updated with the feedback. I am
still dreaming of a php.net wiki for this kind of stuff. If interested
I do of course offer wiki.pooteeweet.org to host these RFC's for the
time being. Using php.net/reST has the draw back of requiring
cvs.php.net karma for maintenance, which would be problematic for new
comers, unless we can do karma on a per file level for this?

Wiki is such a great idea, what were the (political?) reasons for not
having it ? No one to maintain it ?

regards,
Lukas

--

--
David,
Re-read what you are replying.

Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:

Hi,

I really like what Stefan did here with his traits RFC. Very solid work,
even if there are still some people not convinced if they want this
feature in, I have seen little complaints about the way this proposal
was made. Quite the contrary actually. I would like this kind of
detailed thought to become more the norm. Even if at the very beginning
of an idea this quality may not be immediately attainable, it should be
the goal. So for every idea we should have at least someone who tries to
bring the proposal to this kind of level as the discussions progress.

For this proposal I would hope that it would be put on some host we can
trust to not disappear and be updated with the feedback. I am still
dreaming of a php.net wiki for this kind of stuff. If interested I do of
course offer wiki.pooteeweet.org to host these RFC's for the time being.
Using php.net/reST has the draw back of requiring cvs.php.net karma for
maintenance, which would be problematic for new comers, unless we can do
karma on a per file level for this?

regards,
Lukas

What kind of traffic would the wiki attract (rough ballpark) I've got a
few high spec dedicated servers, and could possibly donate one to the
cause - thats if a single server would be up to the task.

regards

Nathan

Hi Lukas,

Am Dienstag, den 19.02.2008, 20:09 +0100 schrieb Lukas Kahwe Smith:
[...]

I really like what Stefan did here with his traits RFC. Very solid
work, even if there are still some people not convinced if they want
this feature in, I have seen little complaints about the way this
proposal was made.

I agree.

Quite the contrary actually. I would like this kind
of detailed thought to become more the norm. Even if at the very
beginning of an idea this quality may not be immediately attainable,
it should be the goal. So for every idea we should have at least
someone who tries to bring the proposal to this kind of level as the
discussions progress.

For this proposal I would hope that it would be put on some host we
can trust to not disappear and be updated with the feedback. I am
still dreaming of a php.net wiki for this kind of stuff. If interested
I do of course offer wiki.pooteeweet.org to host these RFC's for the
time being. Using php.net/reST has the draw back of requiring
cvs.php.net karma for maintenance, which would be problematic for new
comers, unless we can do karma on a per file level for this?

I think more important than the technical implementation details is the
concrete RFC template and the process how to work with such RFCs. We
should have one to show a submitter what we expect to know about a new
feature. I've tried to create one from Stefan great RFC and added a few
points I felt was missing (http://lars.schokokeks.org/php/php-rfc.txt).

To the process: First of all, someone authors an RFC. As long as the RFC
is in not ready, there is a "not ready for review"-comment in the
proposal. Once the author feels the proposal is ready, he sends a mail
to internals. Once the mail has been reached internals, an RFC number is
assigned to the proposal (by one of the wiki administrators or whoever
maintains the numbers). The discussion takes place on internals, and two
results may raise. Accepted and declined. The last one is definite,
while there might be "accepted but change x, y and z" responses.

cu, Lars

Lars Strojny
Senior Software Developer MediaVentures GmbH (http://mediaventures.de)