Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:106521
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAJHtznw0eKbBNJo9TnDwZvvbMMFt5mCo=+SpKLw0zYzq9tKWZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <71581e93-e38a-47b2-9d89-e9ed5850511a@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <71581e93-e38a-47b2-9d89-e9ed5850511a@www.fastmail.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2019 11:42:14 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJvSBVO34EhTDGS1H3q31c0R2u0eiZzYYv_ev-BzisOmdMm=3A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>
Cc: Steffen via internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c765f7058fc0f39a"
Subject: PHP direction and governance [was: Re: [PHP-DEV] P++: FAQ]
From: phpmailinglists@gmail.com (Peter Bowyer)

--000000000000c765f7058fc0f39a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

[List etiquette question: is it good form here to change the subject line
when starting a tangential discussion?]

On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 00:08, Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com> wrote=
:

> PHP doesn't have a coherent philosophy.  It is proudly directionless,
> steered by whoever happens to be writing code this week.  A few years bac=
k,
> Anthony Ferrara proposed developing an actual PHP mission statement to he=
lp
> resolve such debates over direction and was resoundingly rejected.  Right=
ly
> or wrongly, to speak of "PHP philosophy" as a thing one can actually
> reference is simply not possible.
>

I have been working on a proposal for a PHP manifesto / mission statement.
I did not know it had been proposed before. [I haven't tracked down
Anthony's proposal - if anyone has a link, I'd appreciate it]

I started for the same reason: to help the community pull together and
argue less, by having a codified set of values.

On this list there are many different factions, all with their own vision
for PHP. If everyone is fighting to "win", it's an unpleasant, tiring
environment, turns people off contributing, and those who "win" can be
those who keep going the longest, not those with the best idea.

I saw a manifesto helping like this:

"Consider a proposal to remove a function from PHP. If PHP had a manifesto,
heated discussions could be minimised:
  * Does the manifesto say that maintaining backwards compatibility is more
important than cleaning up the standard library? Removing it is not inline
with PHP=E2=80=99s vision.
  * Does the manifesto say that rarely-used functions should be removed to
make the codebase lean? Removing it is inline with PHP=E2=80=99s vision."


Observing the project, I am not hopeful that anything like this could gain
traction without an overhaul of PHP's governance. Someone or some group
would have to have the deciding vote on what went in the manifesto.

In the last few months I have seen:
  * Core contributors should have more/the final say on RFC votes
  * The PHP user-community should have more say on RFC votes
  * The PHP Group have authority over the project
  * The PHP Group do not have authority over the project
  * A longstanding contributor feels they have a leadership position
  * Others feel the longstanding contributor doesn't

I am stating these neutrally, not judging them. Neither am I aiming to
misrepresent positions. If you feel I have, I'm sorry.

I am highlighting that there is no consensus here. I get this is the way
the project has always run (I think of it as the "Linus Torvalds and the
Linux Kernel" meritocracy approach). But: people don't seem happy.

Is there appetite for change?


> To end on a positive note, while I agree that there is often a tension on
> such questions I think PHP has been remarkable in how well it's navigated
> it.  I don't know any other language that has managed to evolve as much a=
s
> PHP has from 5.3 onward with so little relative BC breakage.  The
> new-features/breakage ratio for modern-era PHP is, I think, bloody amazin=
g.
>

I agree, and want to say a big "Thank you" to everyone who made that
happen. The PHP-userland community is too silent about the good things in
PHP, and you who bring the language about deserve way more praise than you
get.


Finally, I am going to wait at least 6 hours, ideally 12 before replying to
responses, and I encourage you to join me in this. My knee-jerk replies can
be more argumentative than I mean them to be, and by slowing down the
conversation I hope we can have a reflective and thoughtful discussion.

Peter

--000000000000c765f7058fc0f39a--