Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:129804
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAMW7n8B9XHzF5ND21-hNYtw26EnE+0b+W0Nv=wb_ayMmu4CbKw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMW7n8C1m08+pKKYBGkMnNZmGmu-_kkxS-r_SCuRupBY+RHe5A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMW7n8C1m08+pKKYBGkMnNZmGmu-_kkxS-r_SCuRupBY+RHe5A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2026 11:59:52 -0300
Message-ID: <CANCsWvfXWDjdmKFFQvV0Ger6yNVSfOhQqnbyTr7bEQHSjmXyLg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] True Async RFC 1.7
To: php internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000da99a00648e72d57"
From: talyssonlima5@gmail.com (Talysson Lima)

--000000000000da99a00648e72d57
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Em seg., 12 de jan. de 2026 =C3=A0s 06:54, Edmond Dantes <edmond.ht@gmail.c=
om>
escreveu:

> Hello all.
>
> I think the New Year holidays are already over for most people.
> Therefore, it would be reasonable to set an approximate voting date if
> nothing changes. Today is January 12. I suggest aiming for February 1.
>
> Best regards, Ed
>

It's astonishing how such an important issue, one that could change the
direction of PHP and is highly requested by the community =E2=80=93 native
asynchronous support in PHP =E2=80=93 doesn't receive the necessary attenti=
on.

It's almost disrespectful to the tremendous effort Ed put into it. Everyone
knows that passing the RFC isn't necessary; it's a democratic process. But
apparently, there's a closed group of people who mutually favor each other
and exclude others. Perhaps if this had been proposed by someone like
Nikita, it would have received more attention.

I see many people with this same opinion going in this direction. Maybe we
should improve our mindset?

I see many features arriving and being discussed that don't have 1% of the
impact that true async would bring to PHP. You just need to take the time
to look at community groups. Isn't the community taken into consideration?

--000000000000da99a00648e72d57
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote g=
mail_quote_container"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">Em seg., 12 de =
jan. de 2026 =C3=A0s 06:54, Edmond Dantes &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:edmond.ht@g=
mail.com">edmond.ht@gmail.com</a>&gt; escreveu:<br></div><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rg=
b(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Hello all.<br>
<br>
I think the New Year holidays are already over for most people.<br>
Therefore, it would be reasonable to set an approximate voting date if<br>
nothing changes. Today is January 12. I suggest aiming for February 1.<br>
<br>
Best regards, Ed<br></blockquote><div><br>It&#39;s astonishing how such an =
important issue, one that could change the direction of PHP and is highly r=
equested by the community =E2=80=93 native asynchronous support in PHP =E2=
=80=93 doesn&#39;t receive the necessary attention.<br><br>It&#39;s almost =
disrespectful to the tremendous effort Ed put into it. Everyone knows that =
passing the RFC isn&#39;t necessary; it&#39;s a democratic process. But app=
arently, there&#39;s a closed group of people who mutually favor each other=
 and exclude others. Perhaps if this had been proposed by someone like Niki=
ta, it would have received more attention.<br><br>I see many people with th=
is same opinion going in this direction. Maybe we should improve our mindse=
t?<br><br>I see many features arriving and being discussed that don&#39;t h=
ave 1% of the impact that true async would bring to PHP. You just need to t=
ake the time to look at community groups. Isn&#39;t the community taken int=
o consideration?</div></div></div>

--000000000000da99a00648e72d57--