Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90569
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zort.net designates 96.241.205.2 as permitted sender)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
In-Reply-To: <2011571282.3259.fd941ca0-f3d1-4b3c-8747-f8166ff46b39.open-xchange@ox.myrasec.de>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 11:59:29 -0500
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <8E090391-7655-4DBE-B97E-09D1EFEB1CEF@zort.net>
References: <8B865D2A-6762-430D-9EA1-9B693DE8E8C3@zort.net> <56948002.1080802@gmail.com> <A51E3740-45AD-4522-AFB6-74698066DB95@zort.net> <2011571282.3259.fd941ca0-f3d1-4b3c-8747-f8166ff46b39.open-xchange@ox.myrasec.de>
To: Sascha Schumann <sascha.schumann@myrasecurity.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Internals and Newcomers and the Sidelines (WAS: Adopt Code of Conduct)
From: jbafford@zort.net (John Bafford)

Sascha,

> On Jan 12, 2016, at 11:17, Sascha Schumann =
<sascha.schumann@myrasecurity.com> wrote:
>=20
> Hi John,
>=20
>> And it is *not* acceptable.
>=20
> May I ask who put you in charge to determine whether something is =
"acceptable"
> or "reprehensible=E2=80=9D?

*I* avoid internals because *I* believe the conduct here is =
reprehensible, and not acceptable.

So in the context of the questions =E2=80=9CWhy do people avoid =
internals?=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9CDoes internals want to attract =
newcomers?=E2=80=9D, the only questions which I am attempting to answer, =
and in terms of *my own personal view of internals as a whole* in =
response to those questions, I did, because it is strictly my opinion.

You [=3D the reader, not Sascha specifically] may or may not agree. That =
is fine. You may think that that there is a problem, but it doesn=E2=80=99=
t rise to the level of being reprehensive. That=E2=80=99s fine too. =
Maybe it does, maybe it doesn=E2=80=99t. But this is *my* opinion, *my* =
answer to the question at hand, and it is up to you, and everyone else, =
to make their own decision as to whether there actually is a problem on =
internals. I think there is, and I=E2=80=99ve outlined what I see to be =
the problem. Someone else can answer the questions differently. They may =
not think internals=E2=80=99 conduct is reprehensible. They may think =
the conduct is acceptable. That debate can be had, but it doesn=E2=80=99t =
change my perception.

-John