Hi All I have only some minor feedback to give regarding the PSR development cycle:
Annotation for reference: https://www.evernote.com/l/ACqT4gmzrU5DKLq8iYZC70kGULwQbv26lfs A more details explanation: the new cycle has a verification check to ensure the PSR working group members had the correct stakeholders involved. I assume that this verification probably *actually* takes place during the formation of the working group and the entrance vote discussions. Meaning the relevant voices for major implementers will make themselves known. But since in the workflow diagram it is cited as happening at the acceptance vote stage, I felt it was worth bringing up. I believe it would be more appropriate to move this sort of verification to the entrance vote stage. My thought process is that after a lot of commitment in time and energy has gone into developing the PSR draft, it would be a shame to come to the end of that process only to discover that a stakeholder was excluded or someone's expertise in the working group was misrepresented, and therefore the work is seen as unfit for even an acceptance vote. Regards, On Friday, 5 August 2016 15:01:09 UTC-4, Michael Cullum wrote: > > Hi all, > > A vote for FIG 3.0 is [potentially/hopefully] getting closer and one big > thing people had been asking for is a TL;DR of FIG 3.0 to give an overview > of the new structure and processes. > > The last couple of days I've been working with Larry on compressing it > into 3 graphics and a post that, according to medium, takes 3 minutes or > less to read. I'd invite to you all to have a read of that version, and if > that wets your appetite for more, then of course I'd suggest you take a > read of the full bylaws (after all, that is what will actually be being > voted upon). > > I'd love to see some active discussion (or if you are just in general > agreement about it, some +1s) about this over the next couple of weeks as > discussion has been quite quiet on it over the last few weeks on the > mailing list; however what I've heard from people at conferences and > elsewhere has been a good positive reception. Assuming there are no major > objections and we don't end up making major changes we'd like to see this > going to a vote on the 17th August, to end on the 31st August. The CC > elections would then be able to take place in September. > > Without further comment, *the TL;DR of FIG 3.0: http://bit.ly/fig-3-0 > <http://bit.ly/fig-3-0>* > > Many thanks, > Michael & Larry > (Note: I am not posting this as a secretary but as a co-author of FIG 3.0 > in line with my declared conflict of interest) > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/4a3bcee0-f104-42a8-930b-b8aff867771a%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
