Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@morrisonlevi
Last active August 29, 2015 14:04
Show Gist options
  • Save morrisonlevi/7f96c2dacdfbd69c4016 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Save morrisonlevi/7f96c2dacdfbd69c4016 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Dear Internals,
At the risk of exacerbating the ongoing drama, we (authors below) ask
that the community stop to examine the circumstances surrounding the
in-progress PHP6/7 RFC vote.
The vote has already been cancelled once, and we acknowledge that many
will not care about the details presented here. Most people will
simply want a resolution, and that's perfectly understandable. We all
do. We also believe it's important that the RFC process (and changes
to PHP) arise from objective, unbiased information. Unfortunately, the
history of this RFC has not aligned with these goals.
The RFC is, if in no other way, linguistically biased towards PHP 7.
Statements of clear opinion (e.g. "the case for 7 is very strong")
have no place in an objective RFC. We are bothered that the RFC is
openly biased because the reason the vote was stopped in the first
place was to remove the bias towards PHP 6 that was initially
present.
It is also clear from conversations we've observed on the list, on IRC
and on Twitter that emotional attachment is an extremely significant
reason to skip PHP 6, yet it isn't mentioned anywhere in the RFC.
While emotional attachment may or may not sway your vote, it is an
important historical context that contributes to why this is a
contested issue.
The RFC in question went to vote within 24 hours of a major revision.
This is hardly enough time for serious discussion or contemplation.
Had a large enough feedback window existed there would be little need
to call for a re-vote. And while we believe that a re-vote is
necessary in this case, this message is more concerned with behavior
than process. While this is not a violation of the wording of the
voting RFC, we believe it is against its spirit.
As a result of the issues presented here, we believe that voting on
this RFC be closed again until these concerns and any others are
resolved.
But most of all, let us do better next time.
Sincerely,
Levi Morrison (levim)
Anthony Ferrara (ircmaxell)
Bob Weinand (bwoebi)
Tjerk Anne Meesters (dattibaw)
Phil Sturgeon (philstu)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment