Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:78420
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.216.173 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: julienpauli@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <slrnm4t05a.775.dsp@dsp.local>
References: <php-mail-d1dee1060d0e519b421e241f31037078549681831@git.php.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.11.1410242103530.4012@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl>
 <1414217636.2624.89.camel@localhost.localdomain> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1410261047380.4012@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl>
 <BLU436-SMTP249111049DD6549BD1ABC5DE2910@phx.gbl> <slrnm4t05a.775.dsp@dsp.local>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 14:43:33 +0100
Message-ID: <CAMUwpuTCO3zb6ijttTudiF-CqL=3TOQ2O_ssHKUB-1iAe7HBYA@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Soria Parra <dsp@php.net>
Cc: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHPDBG nonsense (Was: Re: [PHP-CVS] com php-src: Made
 phpdbg compatible with new engine: ...)
From: jpauli@php.net (Julien Pauli)

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 6:27 PM, David Soria Parra <dsp@php.net> wrote:
> On 2014-10-26, Bob Weinand <bobwei9@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Am 26.10.2014 um 17:23 schrieb Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk>:
>>>
>>> On 26/10/14 15:41, Bob Weinand wrote:
>>>> Ask them at PhpStorm. They were pleased to not have to use DBGp for it=
.
>>>> They just initially requested it because they didn=E2=80=99t knew any =
better protocol. That=E2=80=99s all.
>>>
>>> PHPStorm like PHP-FIG have their own agendas which do not play well wit=
h
>>> other groups of developers. Just because one thinks an idea is good doe=
s
>>> not mean that everybody else has to adopt it. So what becomes 'main
>>> stream' has to have common consensus and the voting rules provide that.
>>>
>>> When was the vote on this rework taken?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Lester Caine - G8HFL
>>> -----------------------------
>>> Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=3Dcontact
>>> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
>>> EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
>>> Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
>>> Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk
>>
>> There wasn=E2=80=99t any vote and there won=E2=80=99t.
>>
>> /dev/null likes to listen to your complaints why we should have voted on=
 it.
>
> step back a bit here, stay professional, there is no need for passive
> aggressiveness.
>>
>> But now it=E2=80=99s in, let=E2=80=99s rather try to improve what=E2=80=
=99s there than screaming for a vote - it won=E2=80=99t help anyone and hin=
der possible work on improving the current thing.
>
> From what I see, the complan is about the initial protocol and not about
> how to improve it or not. This whole protocol business needed an RFC,
> which I haven't seen. So we should come up with a good way of deciding
> which protocol to use and how to implement it. Before this, I would stron=
gly
> vote to not incldue the current verison in PHP 7 at all. Also let me poin=
t
> out that the code belogns to everyone and everyone will have to deal with=
 it
> so we better make an informed decision now.

Hello people.

When PHP 5.6 has been released, few weeks/months ago, I explicitely
stated Ferenc (RMing 5.6 together with me), that *it is not a normal
thing to have an external domain for phpdbg*

This has never happened before, FWIR

Every code that is part of PHP, that is merged into php.net repo ,
falls under the PHP licence *and* the PHP process of doing things.

One chance is that today the subject shows to everybody and not only
RM wondering about this. Cool.
I'm all +1 to merge phpdbg web site content into official php.net documenta=
tion.

Guys, from an external POV, phpdbg seems very strange for people. Why
the hell does it have its own github repo and its own website ? This
is something that has never been seen for *official* php.net content
and our users are asking questions / assuming things.

Xdebug is *not* a php.net project, and Derick hash always managed to
keep this line clear to everybody (since 10 years now).
Derick has never asked to merge Xdebug to core, because (please
confirm) probably he wants to keep the lead on the project, and make
it evolve like *he, as author and maintainer* wants to. This is
something that can not happen to a PHP-project code.

phpdbg is under php.net ; every decision about phpdbg should then be
debatted with all the team, and new ideas, such as a protocol, RFC'ed,
whoever are the maintainers of the code. It's like that for every
piece of code, of every extension.
This is PHP process. If you dont want to adhere the rules, you can
keep your ideas yours, in a separate repo, like Derick does for
Xdebug.
People must understand that as soon as the code is part of the PHP
project, it is owned by the PHP project, and not a single/duo person
anymore.

Julien.Pauli