Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- rfc:howto [2021/08/14 11:02] – Update link to ML rules cmb
+++ rfc:howto [2023/02/04 15:05] (current) – Added notes on not re-using RFC docs, and respecting authors danack
@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
       - Log into the wiki with your wiki account.
       - Navigate to a URL like https://wiki.php.net/RFC/my_RFC (use your feature name in the URL).
-      - Push the "Create this page" button, fill out the supplied [[rfc:template|template]] and save.
+      - Push the "Edit this page" button, fill out the supplied [[rfc:template|template]] and save.
       - Edit https://wiki.php.net/RFC and link your RFC under the "In Draft" status.
       - Write the RFC.
@@ Line 23: / Line 23: @@
     - Update your RFC page to "Voting" status
     - Add the doodle voting macro, for example: <code>
-<doodle title="RFC name here" auth="your_username_here" voteType="single" closed="false">
+<doodle title="RFC name here" auth="your_username_here" voteType="single" closed="false" closeon="2022-01-01T00:00:00Z">
    * Yes
    * No
@@ Line 42: / Line 42: @@
     - Change its section on https://wiki.php.net/RFC to “Implemented” under the implemented PHP version
+==== Notes ====
+=== Open new RFCs rather than re-use existing documents ===
+In general the status of an RFC should not be moved backwards to an earlier status. In practice there will be times when people accidentally open the voting too early, or some serious problem is found with an RFC during the voting phase, in those cases it's fine to move the status back until the problem is fixed. But as a rule, leaving each RFC document with a clear history of what happened to that RFC makes it easier to understand past discussions.
+Also, we have rules about when RFCs are allowed to be put into voting. If a RFC document has been re-used there could be some confusion about when it is allowed to be put to a vote.
+Leaving the previous RFC document intact, with the results of a vote if one was taken, leaves a clearer document trail than if the document has been recycled.
+It can also be useful to create a new RFC document when an RFC changes significantly during it's discussion. Although previous versions of documents are available through the wiki, finding where an RFC was re-written and trying to understand why it was, are quite difficult. Leaving the previous version intact, with a note pointing to the new version makes understanding discussion history much easier.
+=== RFCs 'belong' to a single author ===
+Although minor typos can be fixed by other people, any significant changes should be approved by the original RFC author.
+If you wish to 'take over' an RFC, you need the express consent of the RFC author. If you can't get that consent, for example the person doesn't respond, then please open a new RFC document.
+=== Don't list someone as an author without their express consent ===
+There have been cases where someone has added someone's name as an author of an RFC, and this has caused drama as the person wasn't aware that they had been added.
+If you want to credit someone for having done a large amount of work, e.g. when taking over an abandoned RFC, you can do that by adding the phrase 'based on work by' e.g. "Author: Danack, based on work Anthony Ferrara". Though people are free to ask for their name to be removed even in that case.
 ==== External Resources ====
   * [[https://blogs.oracle.com/opal/the-mysterious-php-rfc-process-and-how-you-can-change-the-web|The Mysterious PHP RFC Process and How You Can Change the Web]] by [[http://people.php.net/user.php?username=sixd|Christopher Jones (sixd)]]

Differences

Page Tools