On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 4:56 PM Dan Ackroyd <dan...@basereality.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 at 09:45, Peter Kokot <peterko...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Yes, last time I was asking this, there was a clarification that > > certain people from the group internals can veto particular RFC. > > Please could you point to where this alleged rule has ever been > written down or agreed to? > There's indeed no such rule that any individuals have a veto power. > Although certain people may have claimed this is a rule, it's never > been agreed afaik. > I'm not aware of anybody who ever claimed that such a rule existed, either. If people are alluding to me - then I don't claim I can veto anything; I think it's also clear from what I think about the short tags deprecation RFC that *if* I had veto power, that would be an instance where I'd use it. The reason we went for V2 aren't because of a veto, but because of issues in the previous RFC. With that said - the source code of PHP is copyrighted by the PHP Group - and it's a fact that is mentioned at the top of every PHP source file. The PHP Group is mostly inactive, and will likely stay this way, but under some extreme situations - it might choose to act (if ever - probably primarily around things that have to do with process). I think when we adopt a Code of Conduct one of the things we need to > make explicit is that "claiming authority that is not codified" is > explicitly a thing that will not be allowed in internals discussions > as it seems to keep happening and results in a lot of confusion, and > frustration. > The more accurate word here is 'if', rather than 'when'. But I don't think there's a need to wait for a CoC on this one - it should be clear that no individual has veto powers, but it should be also clear that not everything is up for a vote. Zeev
