Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:121293 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 74875 invoked from network); 13 Oct 2023 01:30:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 13 Oct 2023 01:30:51 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BAFF180212 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2023 18:30:50 -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=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-pf1-f176.google.com (mail-pf1-f176.google.com [209.85.210.176]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2023 18:30:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-f176.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-6934202b8bdso1286559b3a.1 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2023 18:30:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1697160649; x=1697765449; darn=lists.php.net; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=3U1mPB8NwI841kAtNdVbl3TpJgb2ikxVJCN9bxVbK2A=; b=KwZMSOIuFdlMIlznPlr1LKU9HIqN5NczIzDbep1x8wmc2DgQPL0ZcqjW0ssDMGkYrk XftlDGMhPLJbZXw0BoYOcvMOzd/oDiZmo1vpYk3uqqN7SfC8QbBVcAwhC/oPXA0MSVOP k5mniXLTaYMPN6P9qWBaGPPfWQ2mZ9W4NfXUcfF6uxbWQDdreeSDVtF9tcYBYSDaHaF3 qF2pxlsHQcp+fjiPwvzzZ3oRCIAZwzbId6WADVHWpXK9TV5Fyb/3euxHF0K8r6ANkvpV xPSBx5phhp/5AR7QJSE1ObFjIhPjkZ+4FflV6wj8WGx7yv/Cv8i1/qTHLret7u+zQKpO mUSg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1697160649; x=1697765449; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=3U1mPB8NwI841kAtNdVbl3TpJgb2ikxVJCN9bxVbK2A=; b=ISQ1k14VFtRGm0j+wImtWseuy1vj/8tZRDZ3+emcH2+qaJkQYk2rUVd8FPPsKb1G9g YlgzdPcrpMhaGX82Y7aduqqCN8oUR6TTADHy1m6vNeBBiqN6aiOCxs+xTfhnG+5KoTwj Hx9ZoYmAXdnYCjSe+Ypnmh6VubLd/ry4imkD26LPc8qcEp3aTu04chr8u7iVS7EKYLkr eoAiMxX5crOG6vNOVYZGCpRf33g74jdZ3lp/CEBgHq/W0cE/e0xF2ucZVv6JGN+XAWzJ 42wr3NTx3Agtt4TouHMm6TfnMhUJ6tu28zf8sSmKP5VWIU2j6Q8Ew3Ddu3HvO26GA31E 78Zw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyN2QalM8bIFnfIfqQ3/+fGC/DQOEC09GEuPA33+jdH1aND6kqe rEmAAK+MiTME++JjhLPKW/QLiY1GsNPuPUz2N/L2V6yQVEM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGUOKmFjey/PikZxT5SvplQR59PNfu+or+wrivsCjxYj8pb977/WZAMGGhiie+SUkP8RIQm+vhHLwsJ3O0XBfg= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:1611:b0:15a:13f3:49ca with SMTP id l17-20020a056a20161100b0015a13f349camr34289419pzj.9.1697160648801; Thu, 12 Oct 2023 18:30:48 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <0b72d5e0-94dc-8837-bfd4-d2e24ab9db05@online-presence.ca> In-Reply-To: <0b72d5e0-94dc-8837-bfd4-d2e24ab9db05@online-presence.ca> Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2023 18:30:21 -0700 Message-ID: To: Lanre Waju Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000099425d06078f01b7" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Why did fibers get added to php core over something more fleshed out like swoole? From: jordan.ledoux@gmail.com (Jordan LeDoux) --00000000000099425d06078f01b7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 6:00=E2=80=AFPM Lanre Waju wrote: > It sometimes seems as though certain choices may not align with the best > interests of the PHP community. I would appreciate it if you could > provide insights into why this might not be the case. > > To find out why Fibers was done instead of something like Swoole, I'd suggest reading the mailing list discussions on those. That was a discussion that DID happen on list, and you can read about it there without us rehashing it for no particular reason. The way you ended this email though is very "guilty until proven innocent", and I think it's unlikely you're going to get many responses based on the way you phrased this and the implied accusation it entails. This is coming from someone who has their own reservations about how PHP voting is conducted. It's a discussion that very few people want to have because of how drawn out and heated it is likely to be, and the fact that a significant number of people don't see any problem with the current system. Trying to start that conversation with "it seems obviously broken, prove me wrong" sounds like just about the worst framing that discussion could have if you want it to be productive. Jordan --00000000000099425d06078f01b7--