On 2023/03/06 00:43, Juris Evertovskis <ju...@glaive.pro> wrote:
> The current amount of secondary votes makes it feel daunting. I would
> suspect not all voters will think thoroughly about each of the questions.
> I suggest that most of these questions could be agreed upon in discussions
> before the vote.

Casting a vote seems like the canonical way to get a decision, but I
agree that the number of secondary votes makes this RFC somewhat
unwieldy, that was my thought as well.  If the discussion leads to an
agreement, of course I'm open to removing affected secondary votes.
For now, let's consider the list of secondary votes like a discussion
agenda.

> Maybe the RFC could propose a certain wording of the guidelines? The
> community could then agree on most details via a discussion.

Yes, that should certainly be amended, but I did not yet suggest a
wording, because that would be the result of the pre-vote discussion.

I'm not even sure if this RFC isn't ill-advised - it is based on my
(undisputed) understanding that code optimizations are not covered by
what is allowed to be done without a RFC (after somebody pointed out
that merging my work violated community guidelines), yet every day
other people's code optimizations are accepted.

Not just that - at least once, after my work was reverted, somebody
else resubmitted the exact same change and it got accepted.  I'm
confused, and I seek clarification.

Max

-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to