On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 10:41 PM Mark Trapp <m...@itafroma.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 9:59 AM Jeffrey Dafoe <jda...@fsx.com> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 4:01 PM Erick de Azevedo Lima > > > <mailto:ericklima.c...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Maybe if such a feedback was given before and it was decided to go for a > > > trimmed version of the feature, maybe Ilija/Larry could have had less > > > work to implement and test all the variantes they've done. I think if a > > > person has such numerous concerns, it should be exposed ASAP even if your > > > thoughts are not > > > totally clear. If you had a chat directly with Ilija/Larry, they would be > > > aware of such concerns and would expend efforts to address these concerns. > > > > > To an outsider, it looks wild when feedback starts coming in right before > > > the vote starts. What's even more startling is that there are people with > > > voting rights who have never participated in the discussion at all, yet > > > have a right to wordlessly affect the vote's outcome. I sincerely hope > > > Ilija and Larry's work don't > > > go to waste here. > > > > I hope that the property hooks feature goes through. I've used it in C# and > > it reads nice and saves time. > > > > Waiting until the last minute to express a significant design disagreement > > is disrespectful of the time the RFC authors have spent working on this > > proposal. It's also counterproductive to the PHP project overall. > > > > -Jeff > > Just a friendly reminder that feedback on why people vote against RFCs > has been desperately sought after and requested each time a seemingly > popular RFC is rejected, and the feedback provided by others for this > RFC was done so in good faith, before voting started, allowing the RFC > authors to address said feedback should they choose to acknowledge it. > > And in general, the wider PHP community does not pay attention to RFCs > until/unless they come up for a vote. > > Admonishing people for providing unexpected or negative feedback will > have a chilling effect for future RFC attempts, as it's much easier to > just silently vote no than to be attacked simply for providing a > dissenting opinion at an inconvenient time. > > - Mark
Hey Mark, I think that is fair, but I'd also point out that RFCs have been rejected in the past simply because voters felt it was "too last minute" before a release. I don't think it's fair to decline RFCs for being too last minute, but when the inverse happens to an RFC: a huge dissenting opinion at the last second, call foul. Largely, I agree with you but it's worth pointing out the incongruity here. Robert Landers Software Engineer Utrecht NL
