On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Zeev Suraski <z...@zend.com> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Andrea Faulds [mailto:a...@ajf.me] >> Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2014 1:59 AM >> To: PHP internals >> Subject: [PHP-DEV] RFC Process: Should we hold two different votes? >> >>Why not hold two >> different votes on an RFC, similar to how legislation is passed in the UK’s >> House of Commons? > > I can think of two key reasons for why not: > > 1. It's more hassle. Unlike parliament members, this work is voluntary and > we should be respectful of people's time. While dividing this to two votes > may save the RFC proposer some time, especially in case his proposal doesn't > pass the initial vote (so that they won't have to invest efforts in creating > a detailed proposal), for everyone else, this is going to be a lot more > hassle. > > 2. In my experience, there are few cases where the details of the RFC don't > affect my yes/no decision. Voting 'in principle' without having the details > bares very little significance. Also, running two votes may also create > perception in some people's minds that if an RFC passed the initial vote, > it's now only a matter of deciding between options, when again, given that > the devil is in the details, once these details are known there may not be a > majority in favor of the feature in the first place. > > All in all, I don't see why this extra step cannot be simply replaced with > an informal discussion on internals, before the RFC is even written, to > gauge people's response. > > Zeev
I like Zeev's answer here, in the meaning that I have the feeling that everyone would vote +1 to add many cool things to PHP. But internally, things are sometimes hard to implement, or just too big to get in without changing all the code or may have bad interaction with each other (like RFC-A will conflict in implementation with RFC-B). People with no idea on how things work internally would probably vote yes to every new idea, without really measuring the impact it will have on the code base, both on development *and* maintaining the new code base (which is pretty hard to do as well). It's like saying "I'm +1 for having flying cars, now people I let you do it and I have no idea on how that will work". I don't really like such direction. We are all here technical people, and should vote global decision with a clue on how this will technically be achieved. I'm afraid such a new process will see everybody say +1 to everything, but barely few people really working on the "real" things => the code. Or having RFC voted +1 , but finally abandoned because of implementation details that had not been clear enough in the RFC. Also, an idea cannot come without specification details, as-is , an idea is just an idea => something really abstract and useless until you give some implementation details. Saying yes just to say yes, it's like Christmas : yes, I do want tons of present. That does not make thing move forward Julien.P -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
