Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:110549
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <BY5PR15MB3729227C6536FA3D0EBE2335929C0@BY5PR15MB3729.namprd15.prod.outlook.com>
 <4b921c5f-db2b-1e2a-ed2a-1add5c9b6663@gmail.com> <20200615174645.GP14030@phcomp.co.uk>
 <CANS-=peH1x-1LAr6pxp4bvToVB8hQ7GT_2xynsDmp1W7bDR7ag@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADK1yXJEV_Kuxhr6LqLd+9sXkaboXH5cLW3NnJBaa7=Op72ZXg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJW__o12mwJ68=yKQzNTAGf+ViFV-=TMhhtRPw9weP1wJ+at5g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJW__o12mwJ68=yKQzNTAGf+ViFV-=TMhhtRPw9weP1wJ+at5g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 01:11:59 +0200
Message-ID: <CADK1yXLhKubQXvQrt4-zgS4BftyAyXeMHvYm+=qsH+UB8os3+Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kalle Sommer Nielsen <kalle@php.net>
Cc: Lynn <kjarli@gmail.com>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000623c1805a8278e9f"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] About the use of the terms master/slave and blacklist,
 proposal to replace.
From: deleugyn@gmail.com (Deleu)

--000000000000623c1805a8278e9f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

> I am sorry but I do not think you understand the scale of which the
> PHP project is at.

I'm sorry but you did not get my point. As mentioned above theres 170
places mentioning the term blacklist. When I said "the argument of BC
without knowing the scope" I meant to express that perhaps 1, 10 or 100 of
these could be changed without any BC impact, meaning that perhaps they
barely need an RFC in the first place as it could potentially be just
internal code. Instead of being negative and dismissive of a chance at a
diverse and welcoming environment, let's see what we can easily do first
and take the first step towards making a statement in favor of a better
community.


On Tue, Jun 16, 2020, 00:50 Kalle Sommer Nielsen <kalle@php.net> wrote:

> Hi
>
> Den tir. 16. jun. 2020 kl. 00.41 skrev Deleu <deleugyn@gmail.com>:
> > People arguing BC breaks without even knowing the scope of the change
> > clearly show biased.
>
> I am sorry but I do not think you understand the scale of which the
> PHP project is at. Any change we make to the language has consequences
> for hundreds of millions of websites running PHP, potentially millions
> of developers who work with PHP and so on. Therefore any change that
> breaks backwards compatibility in any way has to be justified. We have
> a rather strict BC policy, something that allowed you and millions of
> others to easily upgrade from PHP5 to PHP7 with next to no changes for
> the most part. Do I personally believe that a change of name for some
> directives, potentially more, are justified? No I do not. That is my
> personal bias here.
>
> Let's assume that 10% of the current user base of PHP upgrades to
> whatever version a change like this is implemented. The number of work
> hours spent on investigating, updating, testing and patching these BC
> breaks which are changes for the sake of change is a crazy amount of
> hours invested into it. Opcache is a very popular extension, changing
> an ini directive means change of build systems, you can certainly
> argue that these changes could potentially just be changed by a tool,
> but even doing so will have cost a substantial amount of hours to
> implement and test. It is easily in the thousands of hours, a normal
> work year for me is about 1900 hours in terms of hours for just one
> person. Demanding that our users should invest so many hours besides
> the usual amount for already upgrading to a PHP version is lunacy,
> especially if the change is to try censor something that has no
> correlation to any racial slurs.
>
> So to say that the arguments about BC breaks (which I believe I was
> the only one to post about in this thread) without knowing the scope
> of the change is void. Yes, any policy for backwards compatibility
> breaks can easily be classified as biased, because they are an opinion
> of the project as a whole, or rather, a policy.
>
>
> > As white men, we're being dismissive, insensitive and strongly suggesting
> > we don't want change. While people may not feel offended by any of these
> > terms being discussed, this thread alone already serves as reason for
> > people to feel like there's no room for diversity in the internal
> community
> > of php.
>
> The "we" in this is extremely biased, it attempts to force me to feel
> as an inferior human (to steal the term from Larry above), because I
> do not agree with your request for a change. The classification you
> just did there is something I personally would feel offended by,
> because you attempt to use my ethnicity as an argument for why I feel
> the way I feel.
>
>
> > I believe that if we cannot come together to take the small (potentially
> > insignificant) step towards making changes that signal a welcoming
> > environment, how are we going to actually take the big steps?
>
> We could start by taking steps that matters for once, censoring words
> that have no correlation to any racial issue because it might offend
> someone because it has the word black in it. What about whitespace? Am
> I a nothing, an empty space just because I am caucassian? There are
> other issues we should tackle to make PHP better, after all, we have a
> major version in the works, set to release later this year. Something
> (excuse my bias here) is way more important than trying to justify
> backwards compatibility breaks for no reason.
>
> --
> regards,
>
> Kalle Sommer Nielsen
> kalle@php.net
>

--000000000000623c1805a8278e9f--