Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:129887
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>
 <CANCsWvfXWDjdmKFFQvV0Ger6yNVSfOhQqnbyTr7bEQHSjmXyLg@mail.gmail.com>
 <79CDB2CC-E397-436E-B5A2-10DA1E451A97@rwec.co.uk> <CAMW7n8BJcC-X-sA0NB_oQLfzry+331TfO1uhvNDGZcoSxe7bFQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <D427F18D-CDEC-4DDE-8169-71F8156F2E48@rwec.co.uk> <CAMW7n8BjxUUiizXbD1Lb526WsV=6erew-rK70gvMoWoQ2sqDmQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADK1yX+fA2epqOn2rcesmVBZMj4taeARhyuNdTky9aH4B6NhWg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMW7n8ALJ2w7iSwVX1TvyiosN_dzj=0NV0XBRZeQ3Hdov98C6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEKnhAFbU5H3qs-s0_FsT6w1Bu8n6HD+BQRt1SoOCUwa3XtT_w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMW7n8CFOafm21nbzPRx35ZXKzi-B0WC+7=X7dJMT=f=GDan-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <9f2fb78d-143e-c84a-8243-97e0352497e4@php.net> <CAMW7n8C41JB14qNM9SqjUEk3_nYMegMqUywR2if6g0YCLKFZ+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <9d2962b9-2278-4fae-9241-9def0f33711f@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <9d2962b9-2278-4fae-9241-9def0f33711f@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2026 14:04:36 +0200
Message-ID: <CAMW7n8C=87rrzxH4n=_XKkVhmxG731cdnsfF-ujYs1ko-O=j9w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] True Async RFC 1.7
To: Rob Landers <rob@bottled.codes>
Cc: php internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: edmond.ht@gmail.com (Edmond Dantes)

Hello.

> I don=E2=80=99t think that=E2=80=99s universally true, or at least it has=
n=E2=80=99t been my experience.
As far as I know, there is no universal truth. PHP plus asynchronicity
plus a crisis of trust is a very specific situation.
And it has existed longer than this RFC. It=E2=80=99s a fairly large topic =
for
discussion, and probably uncomfortable.

> When I personally stepped back
Lately, I=E2=80=99ve been hearing the phrase =E2=80=9Ctake a step back=E2=
=80=9D quite a few times.
But believe me, not a single person who=E2=80=99s said this to me has been
able to clearly explain what they actually mean.
What does =E2=80=9Ca step back=E2=80=9D even mean?

> I want to be clear about something important, though: this isn=E2=80=99t =
a lack of interest in asynchronous capabilities in PHP, nor a lack of willi=
ngness to help.

* Python got asynchronicity in 2015.
* Python is a general-purpose language, and asynchronous I/O is not a
critical feature for it.
* PHP still hasn=E2=80=99t gained asynchronicity. It=E2=80=99s 2026.
* For PHP, asynchronicity matters more than it does for Python.

On top of that, there have been some attempts by different people to
add asynchronicity to PHP, all of which either failed or were ignored.
So there is interest in asynchronicity, but it seems to be buried
very, very deep :)

> contributors need to feel that concerns are being heard, trade-offs are b=
eing explored together, and iteration is genuinely collaborative.

* What concerns?
* What collaboration?
What is this actually about?

Everyone who wanted to collaborate on this RFC has already done so.
I=E2=80=99m running this project 100% openly, there isn=E2=80=99t even a pr=
ivate chat.
Only a few ideas were discussed privately over email, and I always
write about the outcomes of those discussions publicly.

> If the process moves in that direction, breaking things down, explicitly =
engaging with criticism, and evolving the design based on shared input, I t=
hink you may find that more people are willing to invest time and energy in=
to it.

Sorry, but I don=E2=80=99t understand anything from this sentence at all:
* Which direction? What=E2=80=99s wrong with the current one?
* Into what parts should things be broken down, and why?
* What does =E2=80=9Cexplicitly engaging with criticism=E2=80=9D mean? And =
what kind
of work was being done before. Implicit? Hidden?
* What does =E2=80=9Cevolving the design based on shared input=E2=80=9D mea=
n? Who is
stopping you from contributing to an open repository? Who is this
person who is forbidding it? Tell us who they are and we=E2=80=99ll punish
them :)

And you seem to be missing the most important point:
* this project is not something I personally need.
* It=E2=80=99s not my project that people aren=E2=80=99t joining.
* The TrueAsync project was created first and foremost for PHP itself.
* PHP is the one that needs it.

I am already an experienced and fully capable developer without it. I
don=E2=80=99t need to prove anything to anyone.
The problems with the process of accepting large changes to the
language cannot be solved by me. They are outside the scope of my
responsibility.
I don=E2=80=99t need to solve it. I don=E2=80=99t need to create working gr=
oups. I
don=E2=80=99t need to write private emails and ask everyone to vote. I=E2=
=80=99ve
already done the work within the scope of the responsibility.

The remaining percentage of success no longer depends on my actions.

---
Ed