rfc:voting2017
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
rfc:voting2017 [2017/09/11 13:27] – Getting closer to a first draft still zeev | rfc:voting2017 [2019/01/31 13:39] (current) – zeev | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
- | ====== PHP RFC: 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 11: | Line 11: | ||
Specifically, | Specifically, | ||
- | * Clarifying | + | * Redefining |
- | * Clarifying | + | * Redefining |
- | * Clarifying | + | * Redefining |
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 ==== | ||
- | === Authoring === | + | === Authoring |
One or more people who are an Eligible Voter or that otherwise has access to the PHP Wiki may submit an RFC on http:// | One or more people who are an Eligible Voter or that otherwise has access to the PHP Wiki may submit an RFC on http:// | ||
Author(s) should strive to have the RFCs self explanatory as much as possible, and seriously consider - and address - all possible implications associated with the acceptance of the RFC. | Author(s) should strive to have the RFCs self explanatory as much as possible, and seriously consider - and address - all possible implications associated with the acceptance of the RFC. | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Targeted Version(s) == | ||
+ | In RFCs dealing with Changes to PHP, the author(s) should designate which version(s) of PHP they intend to implement the changes for. Typically, this would either be the next minor version or the next major version. | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Patches == | ||
+ | RFCs that deal with Changes to PHP must be accompanied with a patch, that demonstrates that the feature can be properly implemented in a reasonable way. The patch may still be modified (or even completely rewritten) even if the RFC is accepted - the goal in having it is both as a proof of concept, as well as a default implementation even if no further work is done by the author(s) or any other volunteers. | ||
== Voting Options == | == Voting Options == | ||
- | As a part of authoring, the Voting | + | As a part of authoring, the Voting |
For RFCs dealing with Changes to PHP, the voting choice must be a simple ' | For RFCs dealing with Changes to PHP, the voting choice must be a simple ' | ||
Line 76: | Line 82: | ||
== Grouped Votes == | == Grouped Votes == | ||
- | Grouping of loosely related topics into one RFC (such as a list of features for deprecation in a given PHP version) is allowed for the sake of simplicity - but would be considered as separate RFCs as far as voting rules are concerned (see Voting below). | + | Grouping of loosely related topics into one RFC (such as a list of features for deprecation in a given PHP version) is allowed for the sake of simplicity - but would be considered as separate RFCs as far as voting rules are concerned (see Voting |
- | === Discussion | + | === Discussion |
Changes to PHP and PHP Packaging Decisions have substantial influence on PHP and its userbase, and it is therefore important to discuss them thoroughly before they are accepted or rejected. | Changes to PHP and PHP Packaging Decisions have substantial influence on PHP and its userbase, and it is therefore important to discuss them thoroughly before they are accepted or rejected. | ||
Line 85: | Line 91: | ||
The email body itself must include a link to the RFC (http:// | The email body itself must include a link to the RFC (http:// | ||
- | In order to ensure sufficient time for a thorough discussion, a mandatory two week discussion period is required, and the RFC may not move forward to the Voting stage before it passes. | + | In order to ensure sufficient time for a thorough discussion, a mandatory two week discussion period is required, and the RFC may not move forward to the Voting stage before it passes. |
+ | If there is still active discussion | ||
+ | After the initial | ||
- | Once the author(s) believe | + | Note that in order to ensure predictability |
+ | Once the author(s) believes that no additional extensions will be necessary, and assuming they'd like to move forward with the RFC, they must announce to Internals that the Discussion Stage will end at least 2 days before it does. This can be done under the same discussion thread for the RFC. If discussion resumes after that message is sent, the Discussion Stage should/may be extended per the same rules above. | ||
+ | |||
+ | At any point, the author(s) may decide to pull the RFC back into the Authoring Stage (which will require a new Discussion Stage). | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Changes to the RFC == | ||
+ | |||
+ | Any change to the RFC (to the proposal itself, not the meta data around it) will automatically extend the discussion period to end at least 1 week after the change was made (if the period was set to end more than 1 week after the change already, no extension is necessary). | ||
+ | |||
+ | Substantial changes to the RFC - such as adding, changing or removing substantial functionality from it - require a restart of the Discussion Period. | ||
+ | |||
+ | If, due to feedback, the author(s) make substantial changes to the RFC (add, alter or remove substantial functionality) - and the Discussion Stage has to end at least 1 week after these changes are made and announced on Internals. This is in order to avoid last minute changes to an RFC with insufficient time | ||
+ | |||
+ | === Voting Stage === | ||
- | === Voting === | ||
In this stage, Eligible Voters may cast their votes based on the voting options of the RFC. | In this stage, Eligible Voters may cast their votes based on the voting options of the RFC. | ||
- | When the author(s) decide to move to this stage (following the workflow in the Discussion | + | When the author(s) decide to move to this stage (following the workflow in the Discussion |
Subject: | Subject: | ||
Line 103: | 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 114: | Line 140: | ||
+ | === Accepted RFCs === | ||
- | === Eligible Voters === | + | If the RFC clears the required majority it is considered Accepted. |
- | The following people are eligible to cast votes on RFCs: | + | Subject: [RFC ACCEPTED] Foo Bar Baz |
- | * People who have contributed | + | At that stage, the author(s) and/or others may proceed |
- | * Members of PHP-FIG (as per http://www.php-fig.org/ | + | |
- | * Additional groups - requires metrics: | + | 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 |
+ | |||
+ | === Rejected RFCs === | ||
+ | |||
+ | In case an RFC does not reach the required majority it is considered Rejected. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Subject: | ||
+ | |||
+ | If the author(s), or others, are still interested in pursuing it - they may do so, but only after a 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 a Hibernation Period, may not target that same mini version | ||
=== No Discussion/ | === No Discussion/ | ||
- | Based on global common vacation periods that affect a substantial subset of the participants in the PHP project, authors should avoid having discussion and voting periods take place during August or the second half of December. | + | Based on global common vacation periods that affect a substantial subset of the participants in the PHP project, authors should avoid having discussion and voting periods take place during August or the second half of December. |
In addition, RFC author(s) are encouraged to be sensitive to periods with intense conference activities and avoid overlapping with them as much as possible. | In addition, RFC author(s) are encouraged to be sensitive to periods with intense conference activities and avoid overlapping with them as much as possible. | ||
+ | |||
+ | === Restarting Polls === | ||
+ | |||
+ | Generally, author(s) should only move RFCs that they feel very comfortable with to the Voting Stage. | ||
+ | |||
+ | In case of a minor oversight or minor change that the author(s) feel is absolutely necessary, they may request to restart the vote by sending an email to Internals, with the subject line: | ||
+ | |||
+ | Subject: | ||
+ | |||
+ | And explain which changes they intend to make to the RFC. Since there is no way to quantify what constitutes ' | ||
+ | |||
+ | If a request to restart is rejected, the author(s) may choose to either conclude the Voting Stage, or Withdraw the vote. | ||
+ | |||
+ | === Withdrawing Votes === | ||
+ | |||
+ | Withdrawing votes is not encouraged, but allowed; | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ==== Eligible Voters ==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | 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, | ||
+ | * Members of PHP-FIG (as per http:// | ||
+ | * Major PHP Manual contributors (metrics?) | ||
+ | * Additional groups - PHP-QA? | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | == Grandfathering of Current Voters == | ||
+ | |||
+ | To allow for a smooth transition into this new eligibility system, users who have voted in at least 3 php.net polls between July 1, 2016 and June 30, 2017, and do not otherwise qualify as Eligible Voters under this RFC - will temporarily be considered Eligible Voters. | ||
===== Open Issues ===== | ===== Open Issues ===== | ||
- | * How do we vote on this one? | + | * Mandatory ' |
- | * Do we want to have a minimal | + | * Targeted version |
- | * Plenty more, I'm sure... | + | * Require a patch for Changes to PHP? **DONE** |
+ | * Partial ' | ||
+ | | ||
+ | * Do we want to exempt additions of functionality into ' | ||
+ | | ||
+ | * Should there be a higher threshold for permanent voting eligibility, | ||
+ | | ||
===== Proposed Voting Choices ===== | ===== Proposed Voting Choices ===== | ||
Approve/ | Approve/ | ||
+ | |||
===== References ===== | ===== References ===== | ||
+ | |||
[[https:// | [[https:// | ||
+ | [[https:// | ||
rfc/voting2017.txt · Last modified: 2019/01/31 13:39 by zeev