Hey Juris,
On 26.7.2026 20:15:55, Juris Evertovskis wrote:
On 2026-07-23 08:44, Seifeddine Gmati wrote:
Hello internals,
I am retracting this vote: I opened it prematurely, in violation of
the voting prerequisites in the Feature Proposals policy. I did not
post an Intent to Vote message at least two days in advance, and
today's 1.0 update to the RFC text is a Minor change announcement,
which starts a seven-day Cooldown Period during which no vote may be
called.
Hey all,
I'm a frequent reader/follower of this list as well as an occasional
participant and a one-time RFC-attempter. As such I never felt like
I'm "internal enough" to comment on the process. But since no one else
seems to be bothered by it, I would like to bring this up after all...
The "new" process (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/rfc_discussion_and_vote)
feels very discouraging to me. All the mandatory cooldowns, cooldown
resets on minor changes, announcements to vote, cooldown resets on
inactive discussions appears to me like bureaucratic hoops that people
have to jump through. The process was hard and daunting enough before
this.
I understand the extremes that the rules are preventing like someone
suddenly launching a vote for an RFC that has been dormant for 20
months. But in practice many of the mandatory cooldown resets,
activity bumps and other formal messages appear like only serving the
process. This case in particular feels very disappointing to me. The
discussion was done, the RFC text got finalized and it was a great
point in time to launch the vote on the finalized RFC. I see no
benefit of this setback of another week.
BR,
Juris
I fully agree on this, and that's why I voted against that proposal back
then.
On the other hand, we seem to have some contributors, who, sort of
intentionally want to slow down this, to not have the list overloaded
and have ample time to catch up with everything.
You sort of have to decide what you optimize for - easier for authors,
or easier for commenters. But I think in this case it went way overboard
in terms of strictness.
Bob
