On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:17 PM, Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:04 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf <ras...@lerdorf.com> > wrote: > > On 11/10/2011 10:38 AM, Pierre Joye wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 7:18 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf <ras...@lerdorf.com> > wrote: > >> > >>> We are not talking about a specific RFC here. This discussion is about > >>> changing the current way of voting. > >> > >> Yes, and that's what I'm talking about too. > > > > Ok, then I guess I don't understand what your argument is. We already > > agreed that leaders of large projects get a vote and the voting RFC > > (which you helped write) is quite clear that language changes need a 2/3 > > majority to pass but 50%+1 for other changes. Could you please clearly > > state what it is you want to change then? Because so far to me it sounds > > a bit like you are simply beating up on the people who chose to vote > > differently from you on this latest RFC. > > It is clear to me and I get the feeling here, with Tyrael's thread and > Stas arguments that this agreement is all of a sudden invalid. And > that's where I so strongly disagree. > > If that's not the case, and after a 2nd thought, it is actually not > the case, then we can just discard this whole thread and go back to > code and proposals. I only find very disturbing to have to explain and > argue so many times about that only because we have a edge case in a > proposal (which is perfectly valid, that happens, show must go on). > > If that's the case, could someone please update the voting RFC? The most common questions, misunderstandings: - "that have contributed code to PHP": this is too vague, as it could mean either -- C code (contributed code to the PHP language not to the project) -- any code (web, tests, etc.) -- any contribution (documentation for example) - how are the the PHP community representatives selected? -- the "Representatives from the PHP community, that will be chosen by those with php.net SVN accounts" line would suggest that "we" select the representatives, but from the discussion it seems more likely that we only approve the applications. how would that work exactly? -- is there any technical or other difference between a vote of the community representatives and those with SVN accounts? (both Rasmus and Stas mentioned in this thread that in extreme cases having the majority of the votes isn't enough if the majority of the "core-devs" are against it). -- is there any limitation for the newly approved representatives? (are there any limit on the number of community representatives? etc.) For the record: I didn't created this draft/thread to change the current rules, I only wanted to clear up the misunderstanding and find out what do we all mean by those rules exactly. When I was asked recently by William DURAND that how could he be a community representative I couldn't just send him a link, that here is how, you have to follow these steps and you are good to go. I could only tell him, that by the voting RFC we do have community representatives, and they can vote, but I don't know how that works, but being the lead of the Propel ORM would be make him a good candidate. So I asked him to send an email to the mailing list, hoping that someone with better understanding of the process can clear that up. There is no reply to his mail yet: http://www.mail-archive.com/internals@lists.php.net/msg54229.html -- Ferenc Kovács @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
