Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:52304
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.213.42 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
         :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=adARxm4zVgXfk7UwoMnx390/iUT5dIZNDrKoR2z9/Nd5bgfkjlBCV99D5gJdWDisDN
         oXSQXhY/UZx5g318VzmzZPwm5d0H8Int6GRnY6axib9pd4/pWAT7chvfys5NTSirMCRv
         KVsULWq7ymg62Ba6JEd3uCxL4QWw9Q8Yo38dE=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4DCA5744.1030907@lerdorf.com>
References: <4DC729EE.9090600@sugarcrm.com> <4DC75FFF.40008@lerdorf.com>
 <4DC7A7F0.4000504@sugarcrm.com> <BANLkTinn3+MCrSd7BAJCU03FMkuRAeydvA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4DC819D0.5010008@lerdorf.com> <BANLkTi=K8vc3wvwkKVtLS9o0Oh0itB_dTg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4DC81ED6.1050902@sugarcrm.com> <BANLkTikhJ1Z0Gk-cSivoFBFs1Fx8CHz=mA@mail.gmail.com>
 <8757232E56758B42B2EE4F9D2CA019C9013F9F59@US-EX2.zend.net>
 <BANLkTi=0OFHjfSyv3w+3f5+gcPVV7beoeA@mail.gmail.com> <4DCA2192.4080201@lsces.co.uk>
 <BANLkTimpauJ3Dq4LSW+3DKXd6zznHj_-iQ@mail.gmail.com> <CE57F584-3A9F-412F-95A4-E805ABB0B648@lerdorf.com>
 <BANLkTimdDg9bAMBpv+uY=73WNdyAmzEuxA@mail.gmail.com> <4DCA5744.1030907@lerdorf.com>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 13:21:35 -0300
Message-ID: <BANLkTimNUz1P8Pw6EcnCA8Pdh9sAc9sdEQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com>
Cc: dukeofgaming <dukeofgaming@gmail.com>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] annotations again
From: guilhermeblanco@gmail.com ("guilhermeblanco@gmail.com")

Hi Rasmus,

On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 6:30 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com> wrote:
> On 05/11/2011 01:39 AM, dukeofgaming wrote:
>>
>> The link doesn't work, but I'm assuming it is this one?:
>> https://wiki.php.net/todo
>
> That was supposed to be wiki.php.net/rfc (iPad auto-correct messed it up)
>
>> In other words, the ideal situation to move this particular case forward
>> is to have more stakeholders join the discussion, right?. An issue that
>> I see here is that it is not that easy to join in the discussion because=
:
>
> I don't think we need to lower the participation bar further here. It
> doesn't take very long to find a threaded version of the list if that is
> what you think is holding people back. All the lists are here,
> http://php.markmail.org/search/ for example.
>
> But honestly, subscribing to a mailing list and watching it for a while
> before participating is not too much to ask from people who want to
> participate.
>
>> My suggestion for this =E2=80=94and it would be a rather disruptive one,=
 I know=E2=80=94
>> is to move the lists to Google Groups, or at least create one or two as
>> an experiment, say: php-userland and php-dev.
>
> We have such a user list already. Many of them actually, but the main one=
 is
> php-general. Again, refer to the above link where you can see that
> php-general gets way more traffic than the internals list, so there is no
> lack of participation there.
>
>> BTW, Guilherme is an important stakeholder too, he has participated in
>> Doctrine2 annotation-related work:
>
> Of course he is. But like I said, we need all the major stakeholders to
> reach some sort of agreement on large efforts like this.
>

The only point that I see here is that none of them heavily rely on
this feature.
Doctrine/Symfony relies a lot on it, and requires special treatment
that key =3D> value support is not enough.
Please check out these pages for reference:
Doctrine 2 Association mapping:
http://www.doctrine-project.org/docs/orm/2.0/en/reference/association-mappi=
ng.html#mapping-defaults
Symfony 2 Validation mapping (click on Annotations tab):
http://symfony.com/doc/current/book/validation.html#constraint-configuratio=
n

That's the point that I'd like to illustrate.

PHP still lack of standardization in so many places. That's why I took
the most complete approach that could fit in every library I've looked
at.
All I just don't want is to implement a docblock solution that in next
major becomes a separate thing as happened to Java.

My first patch (and I dunno if you remember) was around 80% compatible
with JSR-250, which was carefully planned and discussed by Java folks.
Of course it was a different implementation, without extra burden and
with the inclusion of other powerful artifacts.

Now I'm going to release another RFC for Annotations within docblocks,
but I would really hope that you understand the needs of complex
support instead of a key/value one.

>> The way I see it, PHP has moved by inertia all these years, and it has
>> worked, but I think there are measures that could be taken to lead the
>> discussions towards a more productive path. For example, is there anyone
>> at all that does some kind of moderation?, and I don't mean the coercive
>> type, but the "hey guys, this seems off-topic, can you start this
>> discussion on another email thread?" type of moderation.
>
> Of course. I've often sent private emails to people to politely suggest t=
hey
> take things offline and others regularly step in as well.
>
> -Rasmus
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>



--=20
Guilherme Blanco
Mobile: +55 (16) 9215-8480
MSN: guilhermeblanco@hotmail.com
S=C3=A3o Paulo - SP/Brazil