This is truly developer way. :-)
On Feb 5, 2019 01:10, "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> On 04.02.2019 at 23:59, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote:
>
> > Den søn. 3. feb. 2019 kl. 19.29 skrev Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>:
> >
> >> To answer both you and Sanislav here together, as he raised a similar point,
> >> that presumes that 100% of the "invited outsiders" vote on every RFC. I think
> >> that is unlikely, although I freely admit I have no real data to speculate
> >> either way. Lacking any other evidence I'd say it would probably follow a
> >> similar pattern to Internals day. (If we assume a 175 person voting pool and
> >> a turnout of about 50, then that's in the neighborhood of 25-30%.)
> >> Truthfully, though, none of us have any idea what the total impact would be.
> >
> > As a continuation of my answer above to this one; By looking at the
> > average turnout of people voting as it is now, there is a 50%+ of
> > people with just doc karma in one way or another (single translation),
> > just PEAR or even some without any form of karma voting. Looking at
> > the list of the 175 or so posted, it is a very small margin of those
> > on average that votes for RFCs, meaning that adding externals to the
> > top of that, that number in my original email is gonna be a lot larger
> > and therefore a lot more dangerous if we open the floodgates like
> > that.
>
> In my opinion, the question “who is eligible to vote” is closely tied to
> the RFC *at hand*. For instance, str_begins() wouldn't be much of a
> maintainance burden, and whether it should be included into the PHP core
> could very well also be decided by some of those who won't contribute to
> the implementation/maintainance. On the other hand, whether to add JIT
> compilation may better only be decided by those who would have to
> maintain the implementation and who can assess related issues and
> pitfalls (I'm none of those), but not by those who only can fancy “hey,
> JIT is cool – let's have it!” It's obviously hard to lay down
> respective rules, though.
>
> Anyhow, instead of suggesting some “general improvements/refinements” to
> the RFC process, in my opinion, we should identify *where* exactly our
> RFC process has failed, and *why* it did so. Then we should eliminate
> the bugs (if there are any).
>
> --
> Christoph M. Becker
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
