On 20 September 2014 02:29, Andrea Faulds <a...@ajf.me> wrote: > Hi! > > Perhaps I’m being unfair and overthinking things, but I wonder if it is > really fair for people who have no karma, i.e. not contributors to the > documentation, extensions, php-src or anything else, to have the ability to > vote on RFCs? > > I’d never suggest people without internals karma can’t vote. I think doc and > peck contributors are as valued as any other contributors. However, people > with no karma whatsoever (a blank people.php.net page) voting irks me. > > Thoughts? > -- > Andrea Faulds > http://ajf.me/ >
Hey Andrea, I think you know my personal opinion here. I want the people who are in a position to control the state of the language to be people who actively contribute to the language. Anyone who actively works towards a better PHP (regardless of whether their proposals are accepted or rejected) should be able to have an opinion on what is accepted or not. People who contribute one translation a year, a bug report once, a pecl extension 10 years ago and _nothing_ since then,... I don't understand why these people get to vote on the future of the language that the rest of us "investors" use every day. I think everyone with the ability to vote should have to communicate their reasons behind their yes/no publicly on this mailing list for it to be valid. If you cannot describe in your own words why a proposal should or should not be accepted, why should your opinion be valid? Interest in the language should be recent and relevant. It's difficult to police "legacy contributors", but if they are not interested enough to type a few lines..... the answer is clear. Say no to non-contributors. Cheers, Leigh. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
