I've changed the structure, followed the rfc template now. The voting section isn't available now, because the RFC is under discussion.
On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 10:58 PM Dmitry Derepko <xepo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Tim for the answer. > > Your replies went to the Spam folder. I don't know why. > > I'll change the template as you suggested as soon as possible. > > On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 1:11 PM Tim Düsterhus <t...@bastelstu.be> wrote: > >> Hi >> >> Am 2025-05-27 09:08, schrieb Dmitry Derepko: >> > As Tim said, it needs at least a 2 week discussion period. >> > >> > >> > Could you share the reference? >> >> I already did in my email: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/howto (“When >> discussion ends, and a minimum period of two weeks has passed”). >> >> > Here it is. I've added the link to the RFC. >> > >> >> It took me a while to find the link in the “References” section, because >> that's not where I expected it based on other RFCs. Overall the RFC >> diverges from the RFC template quite a bit. As an example, the “RFC >> Impact” section is entirely missing. The “Voting Choices” section is as >> well. The “Metadata” section at the top is formatted differently for no >> reason (and still indicates that the RFC is a Draft). As far as I can >> tell it's also not listed in the RFC overview at >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc either. >> >> As a first-time RFC author, I would recommend you strictly following the >> template and the “RFC How-To” to make sure that the RFC is complete and >> follows proper process. >> >> Best regards >> Tim Düsterhus >> > > > -- > Dmitriy Derepko > -- Best regards, Dmitrii Derepko. @xepozz
