We could come up with a bylaw that handles both abandonment as well as a voluntary withdrawal. We just need to define that as a status for a PSR.
I'm not against enacting a bylaw for abandonment/withdrawal as I was very much behind the original abandonment rules, I'm just pointing out that it has come up both on-list and at in-person meetings. It's disingenuous to say that it was never brought to the list. On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Paul Jones <pmjone...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Chris, > > > On Sep 9, 2016, at 10:25, Chris Tankersley <ch...@ctankersley.com> > wrote: > > > > You were in the room at ZendCon 2015's FIG meeting when we brought up > the whole abandonment issue and how we should handle it. The notes are here: > > > > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/php-fig/FIG$ > 20Zendcon%7Csort:relevance/php-fig/pxezV88Uk1I/eW3GvtPRCgAJ > > Ah, nice! Thanks for linking to those. > > I note only that the summary mentions "abandonment" (as in "how to mark a > PSR as abandoned due to inactivity") and not "voluntary withdrawal." They > are two different things. > > > > It was then brought up a few months later: > > > > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/php-fig/ > abandonment%7Csort:relevance/php-fig/YBUtydtgm5A/LFb9Qt-RCAAJ > > Same case here: that is, "abandonment" and not "voluntary withdrawal." > > > > So at the very least, it was brought up to the list twice, and very few > people cared to go any further than a discussion. > > (/me furrows brow) Not to reiterare it too much, only "abandonment" has > been brought up. > At the meeting, it was talked about. Once a PSR has been assigned a number, at best it can only be abandoned. Abandonment also covers when there were not the three required actors needed (Editor, Sponsor, and Coordinator), and no one was able to fill those positions. The alternative is that the entire PSR is withdrawn as if it never existed, which either introduces gaps in the numbering or allows re-use of the numbers. From what I remember, the IETF position was brought up (by MWOP I believe) as precedence in that numbers are not retracted, a PSR will always be PSR-[id]. So in this case with a new bylaw like the one above, if you want to withdraw it, you could voluntarily abandon it. > > So my original point stands: Michael, as secretarial assistant, stated > that he and Larry and other "came to the conclusion that it doesn't appear > there is really a way to withdraw PSRs for the moment." > > And my original question to Michael (et al) also stands: "Was that brought > up as a discussion for the whole group to consider? And if not, why not? > Seems like exactly the kind of thing voting members should be talking > about, not the secretarial assistants among themselves." > > I see that Michael has attempted to answer that question in another > missive, to which I will respond shortly. > > > -- > > Paul M. Jones > http://paul-m-jones.com > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ > msgid/php-fig/AD6E01D2-4D49-4ACE-89A5-DA65251940F3%40gmail.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Chris Tankersley http://ctankersley.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/CAL9n4XNh2tp42Jdb_v3_dr5kk5oZrojTfDb8%2BaQiQWHrTMGtyA%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
