Re: On not rushing things at the last minute
| From: | Rowan Collins | Date: | Tue, 10 Jul 2018 19:11:56 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: On not rushing things at the last minute | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-102729@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On 10/07/2018 14:10, Sara Golemon wrote:
What are the causes?I have noticed three approximate (and overlapping) categories of late RFC: 1) Submarine features: Features which have been developed over a long period, but where the author wanted to get things polished before formally announcing, e.g. typed properties 2) Quicky features: Simple changes which people have been *mentally* working on, often just deprecations and edge-case handling changes 3) Sleeping RFCs: Changes which enter initial discussion, go quiet, and sit in "Under Discussion" without reaching a vote In all three cases, I think the general psychology of deadlines comes into play: it's easy to put off those finishing touches when you've got plenty of time, then jump into action at the last minute. There seems to also be a reluctance to target anything other than the current cycle; partly just because "would you like it released in 6 months or 18 months?" is usually "sooner!" One thing that might help, particularly with the 1st and 3rd categories there, is a clearer set of statuses for RFCs and other features. We currently have 61 RFCs in the "Under Discussion" section of https://wiki.php.net/rfc; some of these are effectively abandoned, others just need polishing and taking to a vote. Then there are any number of experiments and TODO lists which could turn into a "submarine" or "quicky" feature. I'm not sure of the exact formula, but some possible lines of thought... - Have a separate status, or a separate list (dare I call it a "roadmap"?) for the RFCs targeting each release? - Include items on that list that aren't ready for an RFC yet? - Find some way to prune that list at key points in the release cycle? - Have some kind of inactivity timeout for what counts as "Under Discussion"? Maybe a new status/heading of "Dormant"? - Have a "put up or shut up" deadline? e.g. if you announce a feature targeting 7.4 now, you have to put it to vote by, say, March, not keep it ticking over until next July Regards, -- Rowan Collins [IMSoP]