rfc:voting_who
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Next revision | Previous revision | ||
| rfc:voting_who [2011/11/09 08:01] – created tyrael | rfc:voting_who [2017/09/22 13:28] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | ====== Request for Comments: | + | ====== Request for Comments: |
| * Version: 0.1 | * Version: 0.1 | ||
| * Date: 2011-11-09 | * Date: 2011-11-09 | ||
| * Author: Ferenc Kovacs < | * Author: Ferenc Kovacs < | ||
| - | * Status: | + | * Status: |
| * First Published at: https:// | * First Published at: https:// | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
| ==== Voters ==== | ==== Voters ==== | ||
| - | The original voting RFC allowed two distinct | + | The original voting RFC allowed two distinct |
| - People with php.net SVN accounts that have contributed code to PHP | - People with php.net SVN accounts that have contributed code to PHP | ||
| - Representatives from the PHP community, that will be chosen by those with php.net SVN accounts | - Representatives from the PHP community, that will be chosen by those with php.net SVN accounts | ||
| - | 1, can be interpreted multiple ways, and it was misunderstood more than once, so the possible interpretations: | ||
| - | - People having php-src karma, and at least one php-src commit. | ||
| - | - People having svn accounts and at least one commit (this could mean documentation, | ||
| - | 2, lacks the definition of how do we select those representatives. | + | Group 1, can be interpreted multiple ways, and it was misunderstood more than once, so the possible interpretations: |
| + | |||
| + | * People having php-src karma, and at least one php-src commit. | ||
| + | * People having svn accounts and at least one commit (this could mean documentation, | ||
| + | |||
| + | Group 2, lacks the definition of how do we select those representatives. | ||
| ===== Ideas ===== | ===== Ideas ===== | ||
| * Maybe we could define different type of votes (language syntax change, adding new feature/ | * Maybe we could define different type of votes (language syntax change, adding new feature/ | ||
| * This could be a good middle-ground between allowing qa/ | * This could be a good middle-ground between allowing qa/ | ||
| + | * It is also a possibility to split the votes of the two groups "php devs" vs. "voice of the people" | ||
| + | * This could also solve the issue that the two group have a different number of participants. | ||
| + | * By that reasoning, RFCs could only be approved if the php developers and the community representatives are both supporting the RFC. | ||
| + | * Of course that is also possible to only require the php-devs vote to pass for accepting an RFC, and the community votes would be used as a measure or guide, but that would somehow made the voting rights moot for the reps. | ||
| * We have to consider that: | * We have to consider that: | ||
| * We have a large number of " | * We have a large number of " | ||
| - | * The number of active core developers are small, for example the [[rfc: | + | * The number of active core developers are small, for example the [[rfc:dvcs|DVCS RFC]] which had a large buzz, only had 65 people |
| * If there is no limit of the number of representatives, | * If there is no limit of the number of representatives, | ||
| * Maybe we could have a pending period for the newly accepted reps, so we won't have a situation that people start requesting voting rights right in the last minute for voting an RFC. | * Maybe we could have a pending period for the newly accepted reps, so we won't have a situation that people start requesting voting rights right in the last minute for voting an RFC. | ||
| Line 36: | Line 42: | ||
| ===== Changelog ===== | ===== Changelog ===== | ||
| 0.1 - Throwing some ideas around. | 0.1 - Throwing some ideas around. | ||
| - | |||
rfc/voting_who.1320825688.txt.gz · Last modified: 2017/09/22 13:28 (external edit)