Re: Capturing reasons for votes for historical sake?

On 17.03.2020 at 09:26, Nikita Popov wrote: > On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 8:09 PM Jakob Givoni <jakob@givoni.dk> wrote: > >> On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 1:29 PM Mike Schinkel <mike@newclarity.net> wrote: >>> If we had that we could list the reasons and the number of votes that >> choose those reasons on the RFC for historical purposes. >> >> Thanks Mike, exactly what I was thinking when I started writing RFC: >> COPA (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/compact-object-property-assignment)! >> >> As you can see in my "Voting" section, I had the idea to capture >> reasons for no-votes, to document it in the outcome of the RFC, should >> it fail. >> It would have saved my research quite a bit if I had had the no-vote >> reasons for the RFCs I reference at the bottom. >> >> +1 on the idea from me! >> > > FWIW this has been discussed a few times already, and I believe the > consensus is: We're happy to have *optional* reasons for votes, if someone > actually implements it. > > For the number of times someone has brought this up on list, there has been > a distinct lack of volunteers for actually making it happen ;) If anybody wants to take a stab at this, patching the doodle plugin[1] would be the way to go. [1] <https://github.com/php/web-wiki/tree/master/dokuwiki/lib/plugins/doodle> -- Christoph M. Becker