rfc:voting

Differences

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

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revisionBoth sides next revision
rfc:voting [2017/09/22 13:28] – external edit 127.0.0.1rfc:voting [2018/02/26 16:45] – Fix internals email and minor misspelling carusogabriel
Line 22: Line 22:
 ===== Discussion period ===== ===== Discussion period =====
  
-There'd be a minimum of 2 weeks between when an RFC that touches the language is brought up on this list and when it's voted on is required. Other RFCs might use a smaller timeframe, but it should be at least a week. The effective date will not be when the RFC was published on the PHP wiki - but when it was announced on internals@, by the author, with the intention of voting on it. This period can be extended when circumstances warrant it - such as major conferences, key people being busy, force major events, or when discussion merits it - but should never be less than minimal time. +There'd be a minimum of 2 weeks between when an RFC that touches the language is brought up on this list and when it's voted on is required. Other RFCs might use a smaller timeframe, but it should be at least a week. The effective date will not be when the RFC was published on the PHP wiki - but when it was announced on internals@lists.php.net, by the author, with the intention of voting on it. This period can be extended when circumstances warrant it - such as major conferences, key people being busy, force major events, or when discussion merits it - but should never be less than minimal time. 
  
 This does not preclude discussion on the merits on any idea or proposal on the list without formally submitting it as a proposal, but the discussion time is measured only since the formal discussion announcement as described above.  This does not preclude discussion on the merits on any idea or proposal on the list without formally submitting it as a proposal, but the discussion time is measured only since the formal discussion announcement as described above. 
Line 43: Line 43:
 In order to save valuable time, it will not be allowed to bring up a rejected proposal up for another vote, unless one of the following happens: In order to save valuable time, it will not be allowed to bring up a rejected proposal up for another vote, unless one of the following happens:
   * 6 months pass from the time of the previous vote, OR   * 6 months pass from the time of the previous vote, OR
-  * The author(s) make substantial changes to the proposal.  While it's impossible to put clear definitions on what constitutes 'substantial' changes, they should be material enough so that they'll significantly effect the outcome of another vote.+  * The author(s) make substantial changes to the proposal.  While it's impossible to put clear definitions on what constitutes 'substantial' changes, they should be material enough so that they'll significantly affect the outcome of another vote.
  
    
rfc/voting.txt · Last modified: 2019/04/22 06:53 by krakjoe

Page Tools