Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:106636
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1908141608160.29731@singlemalt.home.derickrethans.nl>
 <CAAfnsFX_z3oyJ6-sj7K9+LR690cCOAXoy0x7MtWqb6eUrFQThw@mail.gmail.com>
 <6534c240-e721-d5c1-a98c-86dfb9189b00@gmx.de> <5d56d510.1c69fb81.9135b.f92bSMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <5d56d510.1c69fb81.9135b.f92bSMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 17:24:05 +0100
Message-ID: <CAEm8qBQBSQcSf36ad0rUN1165YAWF25LoCaNoxJse6immf1Jkw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Randall <markyr@gmail.com>
Cc: Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f043b605903e6e6e"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Vote: Straw poll for P++ feasibility
From: hisamsonolu@gmail.com (Olumide Samson)

--000000000000f043b605903e6e6e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Fri, Aug 16, 2019, 5:08 PM Mark Randall <markyr@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 16/08/2019 11:18, Christoph M. Becker wrote:
> > It is not necessarily required to have an implementation for an RFC
> > available, see item (6) in <https://wiki.php.net/rfc/howto>.
>
> I have enormous respect for Derick, but I can't help but feel this "RFC"
> was bodged from the start.
>
> There's certainly a place for straw polls, the ability to receive quick
> feedback on opinions and sentiment can be a positive thing in a lot of
> circumstances. This however, seemed more like an invitation for
> internals developers to express that they wouldn't entertain spending
> any time on the proposal, in effect forcefully slamming the door shut on
> it before a proper discussion had been had.
>
> The end result did seem to be like watching Zeev be thrown to the lions
> in the colosseum. While entertaining for a short time, I believe it left
> something of a sour taste in the mouth, and it certainly did not present
> internals well to the outside world. The hasty edits to the Wiki then
> made it worse, and so on.
>

On this last paragraph written below, I'm seriously with you on this.

I believe for anything remotely positive to come out of this whole
> affair.


Things need to quickly and visibly pivot to a meaningful
> discussion about the long term game plan for PHP, and build a consensus
> on things such as strict typing(Optional through declare directive) ,
> overloading in the core functions, and
> perhaps most divisively, if "cleaning up the language" is in itself a
> viable justification for backwards compatibility breaks, and if so, what
> weight(the biggest weight ever) it should carry.
>

Just in case a poll is needed, I added my +1 on the whole section you wrote
last.

>

--000000000000f043b605903e6e6e--