Hi! I haven't fully read the RFC yet, so I'll come back with more formed opinion about it probably, but wanted to comment about a couple of points here:
> Reasoning: If somebody is out of the project for 10 years they probably > lost track on how the language and needs evolved and just voting since > an old friend needed a deciding vote is bad. I agree, though "out of project" can differ... But I think if the person had made no contribution for a decade, then probably he wouldn't be very well informed voter. Easier way would be to make the list of such people and let them ask on the list that their vote will be kept if they want to, with explanation on how they plan to continue contribute (we don't have to require actual contribution, just people promising to do so - we are all volunteers here anyway). People that have long moved on would just ignore that, and people who want to come back will do so. > For groups like FIG I am uncertain. I think it is a good thing if we > push more things out of PHP itself into the userspace (JIT, FFI, ... > allow more and more stuff to be done in userspace) and thus > coordinating with userspace developers and setting standards and > interoperability there is good. However it are the maintainers who > (often voluntarily) have to maintain these things and overruling actual > maintainers is bad as they lose interest. Yeah I'm feeling a bit uneasy about the FIG part too. I mean, having input from major userspace groups is great. But having input and having deciding voice is a different thing. Discussion and vote are different processes, both important but with different results. So I wonder if we can't find some venue to collect this feedback without having people who aren't core developers decide for core developers what should they do. This sounds like something that won't be healthy. -- Stas Malyshev smalys...@gmail.com -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
