This thought is brought on mainly by watching the annotations drama that is currently occupying internals, does anyone else agree it might be a good idea to have a slightly more formal procedure for requesting features and then recording votes pros, cons, side effects, etc. against it. It might do a fair bit to stop anecdotal talk of how many people actually want a feature, and stop the list retreading the same arguments over and over again. Have no idea just yet what this would look like, but an thinking something between launchpad and the current php wiki.
--
James Butler
Sent from my iPhone
This could be good. A custom built site where people can vote for and
against (and maybe neutral) something and then post their reasoning.
Open discussion could still take place on internals, but a site that
would provide a quick summary would be handy. So RFC wiki page + user
registration tied to an email (preferably the one used on internals) +
voting.
We are all PHP people, whipping something up shouldn't be too hard :D .
This thought is brought on mainly by watching the annotations drama that is currently occupying internals, does anyone else agree it might be a good idea to have a slightly more formal procedure for requesting features and then recording votes pros, cons, side effects, etc. against it. It might do a fair bit to stop anecdotal talk of how many people actually want a feature, and stop the list retreading the same arguments over and over again. Have no idea just yet what this would look like, but an thinking something between launchpad and the current php wiki.
--
James Butler
Sent from my iPhone
Formality, in any of its forms, is about as far from PHP or this
project as you could possibly get.
John
This could be good. A custom built site where people can vote for and
against (and maybe neutral) something and then post their reasoning.Open discussion could still take place on internals, but a site that would
provide a quick summary would be handy. So RFC wiki page + user registration
tied to an email (preferably the one used on internals) + voting.We are all PHP people, whipping something up shouldn't be too hard :D .
This thought is brought on mainly by watching the annotations drama that
is currently occupying internals, does anyone else agree it might be a good
idea to have a slightly more formal procedure for requesting features and
then recording votes pros, cons, side effects, etc. against it. It might do
a fair bit to stop anecdotal talk of how many people actually want a
feature, and stop the list retreading the same arguments over and over
again. Have no idea just yet what this would look like, but an thinking
something between launchpad and the current php wiki.--
James Butler
Sent from my iPhone
Formality, in any of its forms, is about as far from PHP or this
project as you could possibly get.
Living in the past is never a good thing.
--
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
John Coggeshall wrote:
Formality, in any of its forms, is about as far from PHP or this
project as you could possibly get.
SO we wait for features people have been anticipating for years ( unicode would
be nice ;) ) while a few people push through their own agendas simply because
there is no way of stopping them?
SOME semblance of order would be nice .... and a road plan forward so we know
what is going on?
--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php