| anatoly techtonik 2005-07-31, 3:59 am |
| ||*()*|| Hi, Sean.
....
SC> I look at the proposal system as a way to work ideas into a solution
SC> that the majority (and sure, ideally everyone) can be happy with.
SC> For example, I have a pseudo-proposal that I've been stalling on,
SC> waiting for the RFC system. Philip also has one (that may have already
SC> been adopted.. ?). http://wiki.phpdoc.info/RFC. My Nomenclature
SC> proposal, for example, isn't something I want to work out on my own. I
SC> don't want to say "Here are the rules. Follow them." I want us to come
SC> to a concensus (as you put it) on the best practices. I think we can do
SC> that.
SC> Please don't look at it as "conflict" and "force", but as "problem" and
SC> "possible solution."
Ok. =) But I think proposal system is bad technicaly, because:
1. It doesn't have revision history - you can't track discussion flow.
2. No revision history - smb. can't be sure, that he/she agreed on first
revision of proposal or some later edition.
3. No separated feature votings - there is often a situation when you
generally agree with proposal, but some of the features are badly
wrong an you have to put accent on them every time.
Well, frankly speaking I don't mind if we will use that system to draw
more attention to this part of phpdoc activity. I don't even know why me
personally dislike the PePr in application to RFC - perhaps I have a
feeling, that it will not be so popular or will be misused. =)
t
--
|