rfc:voting2017
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
rfc:voting2017 [2017/09/14 01:50] – there -> their levim | rfc:voting2017 [2019/01/31 13:39] (current) – zeev | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
- | ====== PHP RFC: RFC Workflow & Voting ====== | + | ====== PHP RFC: RFC Workflow & Voting |
- | * Version: 2.0.0001 | + | * Version: 2.0.0002 |
- | * Date: 2017 | + | * Date: 2019 |
* Author: Zeev Suraski < | * Author: Zeev Suraski < | ||
- | * Status: | + | * Status: Under Discussion |
* First Published at: http:// | * First Published at: http:// | ||
Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
* **RFC**: Request For Comments for a proposed Change to PHP or for a PHP Packaging Decision, published on http:// | * **RFC**: Request For Comments for a proposed Change to PHP or for a PHP Packaging Decision, published on http:// | ||
- | * **Implementation Decisions: | + | * **Implementation Decisions: |
- | + | ||
- | * **Release Manager(s)** | + | |
* **PHP**: | * **PHP**: | ||
Line 50: | Line 48: | ||
**Changes to PHP** must be discussed ahead of inclusion on Internals (see RFC Workflow section below), and win a vote by at least a 2/3 (two thirds) majority of Eligible Voters. | **Changes to PHP** must be discussed ahead of inclusion on Internals (see RFC Workflow section below), and win a vote by at least a 2/3 (two thirds) majority of Eligible Voters. | ||
- | **PHP Packaging Decisions** must also be discussed ahead of time on Internals, and must go through a vote - but given their substantially smaller long term impact, a simple majority is sufficient (>50.0%, or in the case of multiple choice - the options that wins the most votes). | + | **PHP Packaging Decisions** must also be discussed ahead of time on Internals, and must go through a vote. However, unlike Changes to PHP, these decisions are a matter of preference |
- | **Implementation Decisions** | + | **Implementation Decisions** |
+ | |||
+ | Please note that Implementation Decisions explicitly do not include such decisions that have an impact on end user functionality, | ||
==== RFC Workflow ==== | ==== RFC Workflow ==== | ||
Line 123: | Line 123: | ||
Note: Eligible Voters are allowed to vote in only a subset of the votes available in a given RFC, if they choose to. For example, in an RFC with a Secondary Vote - a voter may choose to only cast a vote on the secondary vote, and not cast a vote on whether or not to support or oppose the acceptance of the RFC; Or vice versa, and in the same manner with Grouped Votes. | Note: Eligible Voters are allowed to vote in only a subset of the votes available in a given RFC, if they choose to. For example, in an RFC with a Secondary Vote - a voter may choose to only cast a vote on the secondary vote, and not cast a vote on whether or not to support or oppose the acceptance of the RFC; Or vice versa, and in the same manner with Grouped Votes. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ==== Post Vote Stage ==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | When the voting time expires - the poll must be closed for further voting. | ||
Line 136: | Line 142: | ||
=== Accepted RFCs === | === Accepted RFCs === | ||
- | If the RFC clears the required majority it is considered Accepted, the author(s) and/or others may proceed to implement the proposed changes/ | + | If the RFC clears the required majority it is considered Accepted. At that stage, the author(s) should send an email to Internals, with the subject line: |
+ | |||
+ | Subject: | ||
+ | |||
+ | At that stage, the author(s) and/or others may proceed to implement the proposed changes/ | ||
Changes to PHP should be implemented in coordination with the respective maintainers of the affected areas in the code. Note that the approval achieved with a vote is for the described feature - and not necessarily any accompanied patch. | Changes to PHP should be implemented in coordination with the respective maintainers of the affected areas in the code. Note that the approval achieved with a vote is for the described feature - and not necessarily any accompanied patch. | ||
=== Rejected RFCs === | === Rejected RFCs === | ||
- | In case an RFC does not reach the required majority it is considered Rejected. | + | In case an RFC does not reach the required majority it is considered Rejected. |
+ | |||
+ | Subject: | ||
+ | |||
+ | If the author(s), or others, | ||
RFCs that are substantially similar to the rejected RFC (deal with the same topic, and provide a similar proposal) are subjected to the same mandatory 6 month Hibernation Period. | RFCs that are substantially similar to the rejected RFC (deal with the same topic, and provide a similar proposal) are subjected to the same mandatory 6 month Hibernation Period. | ||
- | RFCs that targeted the next mini version, and are moved back to the Discussion Stage after Rejection, may not target that same mini version - but only the one after it. RFCs that target the next major version may still target it after Rejection and resumption of the Discussion Stage. | + | RFCs that targeted the next mini version, and are moved back to the Discussion Stage after a Hibernation Period, may not target that same mini version - but only the one after it. RFCs that target the next major version may still target it after Rejection and resumption of the Discussion Stage. |
Line 175: | Line 190: | ||
The following people are eligible to cast votes on RFCs: | The following people are eligible to cast votes on RFCs: | ||
- | * People who have contributed to the php-src git repository, and; More than 12 months have passed since their initial contribution, | + | * People who have contributed to the php-src git repository, and; More than 12 months have passed since their initial contribution, |
* Members of PHP-FIG (as per http:// | * Members of PHP-FIG (as per http:// | ||
* Major PHP Manual contributors (metrics?) | * Major PHP Manual contributors (metrics?) |
rfc/voting2017.1505353827.txt.gz · Last modified: 2017/09/22 13:28 (external edit)