Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:95916
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain texthtml.net designates 62.210.206.189 as permitted sender)
To: Tony Marston <tonymarston@hotmail.com>,
 Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>,
 "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <DB3PR04MB2038093881B1A4A5C9BCBD8BBFC0@DB3PR04MB203.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <e32f7773-0e37-5363-f980-01cd33eb3dc5@texthtml.net>
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 21:31:46 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:50.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/50.0a2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <DB3PR04MB2038093881B1A4A5C9BCBD8BBFC0@DB3PR04MB203.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Deprecate PEAR/PECL & Replace with
 composer/pickle
From: mathieu@texthtml.net (Mathieu Rochette)



On 09/11/2016 10:47 AM, Tony Marston wrote:
> Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2016 7:47 PM
>> To: Tony Marston ; internals@lists.php.net
>> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Deprecate PEAR/PECL & Replace with composer/pickle
>> Hi!
>>
>>> You seem to think that any opinion which differs from yours is wrong,
>>> and you try to dismiss that opinion by classing it as "abusive". I'm
>>> afraid this lack of tolerance for different opinions is becoming more
>>> and more prevalent in this forum, and I fear it will have a detrimental
>>> effect on the whole PHP ecosystem.
>> Tony, the issue is not your opinion - which, by now, we are amply
>> familiar with, and to which you are fully entitled. The issue is the way
>> you are expressing this opinion - in a combative style bordering on
>> personal attack.
> The fact that I express my displeasure in strong terms comes from the fact that without it you would not realise how strongly I disagree. In my early days I would try to be diplomatic and gentle in my criticisms only to have them ignored. I therefore use strong words to make it absolutely clear that I strongly disagree.
>
>> I would suggest that if you are interested in your
>> opinion being considered and supported by others, to amend the tone as
>> to be more concentrated on technical merits and less on flame.
>>
>>> That is a valid opinion. Consider the fact that the Windows operating
>>> system was only accepted by large numbers of users as it had a "modern"
>>> GUI and not a command line interface. You try and release a new piece of
>> In fact, Windows does have command-line interface
> That may be the case, but it would not have been accepted by trillions of users if it ONLY had a command line interface.
>
>> , moreover - Microsoft
>> recently invested significant resources into making this interface more
>> powerful and flexible. Moreover, many of the professional programmers
>> routinely use command-line tools on Windows.
> I’m a profession programmer, yet I don’t use ANY command line tools. The fact that SOME do is no reason to say that everybody should.
>
>> It is true that average
>> Windows user does not spend much time in command-line, but we need also
>> to remember that PHP developer is not exactly an average Windows user.
>>
>>> give them the right to force it upon the rest of the world. Most users
>>> are much happier with a GUI than CLI, so not providing a "modern"
>>> interface is showing disrespect to those users.
>> That depends a lot on how you count "most users". If you talk about
>> Windows users, sure, you claim may have merits. If you talk, however,
>> about Windows users *that are PHP developers* - I'm not sure this is
>> true, at least without some factual backing, and it's in no way obvious.
>> In any case, we are a volonteer project, which means we release what
>> project participants build. If you or someone else will produce suitable
>> GUI for composer, etc. - we can discuss it. But stating that somebody
>> unknown should produce some software is useless - it only gets produced
>> when specific people volonteer their time to do it.
> Then I suggest that those who are so anxious to see of death of PEAR/PECL should be forced to provide a viable alternative first. Otherwise they would be just like those stupid politicians who try to force commuters out of their private cars and into public transport without realising that the existing public transport system is NOT a viable replacement and is incapable of taking on the extra load.
again, nobody is trying killing PEAR/PECL. do we need to use strong
terms to make that clear ?
>
> --
> Tony Marston
>

-- 
Mathieu Rochette