Re: Creating a Registry for community provided Attributes

['Andreas Heigl' via PHP Framework Interoperability Group]

Hey all


[snip]

Am 13.06.25 um 13:33 schrieb 'Andreas Heigl' via PHP Framework Interoperability Group:

So all in all:









Any additions to this? Any Objections?

Cheers

Andreas

I did not hear anyone saying that it is a bad idea which implies that the idea has some merits. We have 4 people that are willing to form an initial Working Group (Juliette, Jaap, Vincent and myself), one of which (Vincent) offered to be the CC sponsor. Per the bylaws that right now would not be sufficient for a full working group but definitely for a limited Working Group As the scope will definitely evolve over time and is not expected to be actually finished at one point this sounds more like it fits the PER process. The proposal seems to be to define and maintain a set of attributes that are relevant for more than one single tool so that different tools can use and rely upon a defined set of attributes and users do not need to use several similar attributes with the same meaning for different tools. The expected outcome is a meta-document listing the attributes, possible parameters to them and a usage for each of them. In addition a package will be distributed that contains implementations for these attributes to support usage in code or auto-complete.

So what would be the next steps?





>  Editors are appointed by the Core Committee





Anyone able to shed some light here would be appreciated...





Looking forward to some purely process-related feedback here.

Cheers

Andreas


--
                                                              ,,,
                                                             (o o)
+---------------------------------------------------------ooO-(_)-Ooo-+
| Andreas Heigl                                                       |
| mailto:andr...@heigl.org                  N 50°22'59.5" E 08°23'58" |
| https://andreas.heigl.org                                           |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
| https://hei.gl/appointmentwithandreas                               |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
| GPG-Key: https://hei.gl/keyandreasheiglorg                          |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+

--
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 php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/0cb8632e-364d-4de0-84a3-10765a24b742%40heigl.org.

Is the above information already enough for the editor to call for an entrance vote? ... After reading the bylaws it looks like there is a chicken and egg situation though... > Working Groups are created by an Entrance Vote of the Core Committee. The Entrance Vote includes the appointment of an Editor > The Editor (for a Limited Working Group) or Sponsor (for a Full Working Group) may then call for an Entrance Vote of the Core Committee to enquire whether the Core Committee is generally interested in maintaining a PER for the proposed subject, even if they disagree with the details of the proposal. Do we (Jaap, Juliette, Vincent, Larry, myself and whoever else is interested) now just form an informal group to discuss things off-list or is that something that needs to happen *after* creating a WorkingGroup? I mean we can for sure discuss things separately but I'd rather use "official" means for that so that the process is as transparent to anyone interested as possible.

OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature