On Tuesday, 9 July 2024 at 18:50, Richard Miles <richard@miles.systems> wrote:
> I’ve asked for karma three separate times in this feed alone and it’s pretty > unclear who has that > ability, my apologies for assuming. Since you responded to that message > specifically, I figured you were a karma granter. Probably because this is not how one asks for karma. > Get wiki RFC karma (this is only required if you don't have a VCS account for > php.net. PHP developers can log on with their credentials and already have > the necessary karma to create RFCs): > > - Register for a wiki account at https://wiki.php.net/start?do=register. > - Email internals@lists.php.net requesting RFC karma for your wiki account. > In the email, remind people about the RFC you plan to create. Note that RFC > karma does not automatically give you karma to vote. See > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/voting#rfc_proposer The implication, that seemingly every other person has managed to do, is to send a NEW email thread. The traffic of the list is extremely high at the moment, and the handful of people that can grant karma do not have the time to sift through every single random email. > This just differs from other advice already given and the online how-to page, > but seriously > I'll just get started if thats what needs to happen. You have this opinion > with past experience > granted, but your not really giving practical feedback on why this > implementation is poor. The how-to page *explicitly* says: > Consider whether the feature concept should be voted on before you invest > time in implementation. > Or perhaps an implementation is needed to show the feature is feasible; in > this case, make it clear whether or not the current implementation is being > voted on. For a lot of large features, like what you are proposing, one needs some sort of implementation to even determine the feasibility. I have barely read the thread, but I have serious doubts that you understand the complexity of the task at hand, as you are far from the first one to propose this nor have a go at this. Moreover, considering the volume of the list and RFCs, any RFC that is just about syntax is something that I personally will just vote no without reading as I have, frankly, more pressing things to do. Your RFC and proposal would have way more discussion if you were not proposing this when feature freeze is fast approaching and people are trying to wrap up RFCs they have worked on for the past year. For the sake of your proposal, I would seriously reconsider proposing this prior to September. Sincerely, Gina P. Banyard >
