Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:109573 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 18510 invoked from network); 9 Apr 2020 09:02:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 9 Apr 2020 09:02:10 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4BC91804C2 for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 00:30:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS12876 195.154.0.0/16 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from smtp.opensides.be (smtp.opensides.be [195.154.20.141]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 00:30:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.opensides.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C4F64BD1FA for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 09:30:30 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at opensides.be Received: from smtp.opensides.be ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.opensides.be [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id soE_xWciClMN for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 09:29:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mcmic-probook.opensides.be (63.120.199.77.rev.sfr.net [77.199.120.63]) by smtp.opensides.be (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8854F4BD1C1 for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 09:29:34 +0200 (CEST) To: internals@lists.php.net Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 09:29:33 +0200 Message-ID: <4457935.WvIScnsYDo@mcmic-probook> Organization: FusionDirectory User-Agent: KMail/5.2.3 (Linux/4.9.0-12-amd64; KDE/5.28.0; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [EPILOGUE] Server-Side Request and Response Objects (v2) From: come.chilliet@fusiondirectory.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?C=F4me?= Chilliet) Le mercredi 8 avril 2020, 07:35:10 CEST Paul M. Jones a =C3=A9crit : > ## Lessons Learned >=20 > ### Userland Functionality >=20 > The initial impression is that there is a strong desire for work that *ca= n* be done in userland to *stay* in userland. However, that impression conf= licts with the recent acceptance of `str_contains()`, which is very easily = done in userland. >=20 > **Lesson:** Of functionality that can be accomplished in userland, only t= rivial/simple functionality is acceptable. My take on that is more that functionality in core needs to be =C2=ABperfec= t=C2=BB, or at least near unanimous. And of course it=E2=80=99s way easier = to find a solution which pleases everyone when it=E2=80=99s for something q= uite simple. I do think OO interface for request/response in core is something that coul= d pass, but it would need to be more in line with what people want/expect. > ### Userland Ecosystem >=20 > There was somewhat less concern for "the ecosystem," but it too was preva= lent in the discussion. >=20 > **Lesson:** Perceived challenges to popular userland projects are going t= o be met with strong resistance by their existing stakeholders, even when a= n RFC is explicitly not a challenge to them. You clearly disagree on this with most participants in the discussion, but = saying =C2=ABthis RFC is not a challenge=C2=BB is not enough to make it tru= e, there was a clear overlap of feature between your RFC and existing userl= and projects so it made sense to compare them. =2D-=20 C=C3=B4me Chilliet =46usionDirectory - https://www.fusiondirectory.org