Good day internals,
This morning I read something that's not fun:
https://twitter.com/ircmaxell/status/376027280562073600
Yet another good contributor leaves this community (not the whole PHP
community) because of the way things are done here.
It's true that this is an open source project and everyone can join
and leave whenever he/she wants but like Anthony says, this project
needs more leadership, more vision and definitely a better management.
Someone said that there's no one coming forward or trying to change
things, I may not be the right person to do this but at least maybe
I'll wake up someone who can take action and change things.
Here's some facts:
- a couple of months ago named parameters was a taboo subject, I know
because I've asked for it and everyone went silent, now we have a RFC
discussing it - we had a RFC for autoloading functions but people just can't
understand how to provide feedback and at the end of the day it
resulted in a contributor leaving because of the murkiness here - we have a bunch of RFCs waiting for feedback and being trolled to
infinity by people with their own agendas - having a RFC to make a language change requires to have a patch
which if you don't know C and internals you got no chance of doing.
And if you do know C, PHP internals will drain the soul out of you
before doing something - there's no clear objective for what PHP has / will have / will not
have / will not ever have. - there were patches proposed by Facebook, and others, that are / were
rejected, delayed or ignored. Who heard of Facebook anyway, they have
just one website with a billion users probably running on a a couple
of Galaxy Note 3 and 2-3 iPhone 6 as a load balancers, my cat can do
better I tell you.
Where's Rasmus, the so called benevolent dictator, to actually dictate
and handle the internals? Yes Rasmus, you're making money out of PHP
yet I haven't seen a comment from you in the past months. Wikipedia
doesn't list you as hibernating.
Where Zend | The PHP Company? It's their name, no? They are making
money out of PHP brand, certifications and training? They've added the
opcode cache and that was the single biggest thing they've did in 7
years? Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Then there's that 'little' community of framework developers called
FIG which tried to do some standardization in the way things are done
in userland but guess what. It took 2 years or so for anyone here to
actually think we might really want to add PSR-0 to core. And people
here still have issues with that because it's not in the PHP 'open
spirit' (of the internals). Granted, FIG could do much better but hey,
they follow the example set here by you.
For me this PHP 'open spirit' is just a way of saying: I don't want to
have my head full of real issues so I'll just ignore them and let
others handle them.
Look at other languages. Take GO for example, which is done by the
other big noobs on the market called Google.
If you want, you can actually start and contribute to the language in
less that a week from learning the language! There's documentation
inside their sources (shocking! I know). There are pages talking about
their language decisions and why they do(n't) support certain things.
PHP has some rather prehistoric documentation about its internals and
that's it. Ok, PHP is written in C not PHP that's why it's harder to
contribute to it but it's not like there's documentation for internals
anyway. Or maybe, just maybe, they actually have some good language
design, who knows?
And I know what you'll say:
- yet another one making some smoke, lets ignore him;
- who cares about you complaining, PHP is still the most spread
language for servers - PHP releases very often with new things for developers that they
want / use / need.
But you really expect this to continue forever? If so you are plain
ignorant and you shouldn't be part of this.
So, either you care about PHP and wake up or leave and let others take over.
Or better yet, ask someone like Facebook to take over and that's it.
Maybe they'll be interested in doing that since they had to rewrite
HHVM two times to get more performance out of PHP.
If you don't like Facebook, let Microsoft take over if they are
interested. They have contributors here, they have some programming
languages under their belt.
Or just dismiss the project completely and let the community take over.
But please, stop with these:
- nah, today is not a good day for this patch/ thread
- we have a leader already
- we have people contributing
- look ma' charts are growing, we are still ahead of others
- I'll just be against everything today as I didn't had enough sugar
in my coffee
attitudes as it's really not productive for developers and companies
that are still using PHP.
Florin Patan
https://github.com/dlsniper
http://www.linkedin.com/in/florinpatan
Hello everyone.
I just want to point out one thing about all that internals stuff and
remind about a good idea that has been surfacing a few times through the
years, but now I think it can actually get traction because of recent
problems.
It is based on the fact that there are too many people writing to internals
and mailing lists are not actually manageable at this level. I stopped
following all the stuff around a year ago, when I started to get like 15 to
30 maillist threads in my inbox daily (hundreds of mails) and too much
noise.
So, I think, it's time to move to a forum. Actual forum, that can be
managed, can have sections dedicated to certain stuff and has user
management that allows to mute or actually ban people who are not able to
behave, troll and do other kind's of stupid stuff that disrupts the work.
Many devs are already just ignoring this mailing list, so what is the point
of having it if relevant people just don't read it?
The list should remain of course, just to be used as a notification tool
for new important forum threads, RFC's, daily/weekly digest so that those
who have less time can still follow all the stuff in a compact manner.
Hell, I even volunteer to do integration stuff with mailing list, wiki and
other, just don't give me too much frontend stuff to do.
Arvids.
It is based on the fact that there are too many people writing to internals
and mailing lists are not actually manageable at this level. I stopped
following all the stuff around a year ago, when I started to get like 15 to
30 maillist threads in my inbox daily (hundreds of mails) and too much
noise.
Get a better mail client and better mail filters.
So, I think, it's time to move to a forum.
I hope this is a joke.
Actual forum, that can be
managed, can have sections dedicated to certain stuff and has user
We have multiple lists for different things.
management that allows to mute or actually ban people who are not able to
behave, troll and do other kind's of stupid stuff that disrupts the work.
We can ban people and have done that twice or so. PHP is open. If people
annoy you, you can filter them out.
Many devs are already just ignoring this mailing list, so what is the point
of having it if relevant people just don't read it?
People read what they consider interesting and ignore other threads, and
I assume this here will end in many ignores.
The list should remain of course, just to be used as a notification tool
for new important forum threads, RFC's, daily/weekly digest so that those
who have less time can still follow all the stuff in a compact manner.
While loosing the structuring proper mail programs offer and having
media breaks - switching between forums and mail.
Just a simple examples what mail can do: I can write a mail to the list
an CC the relevant maintainer to draw his attention and he can directly
answer from there. Or I can xpost to bring a discussion from the "CVS"
list, about some "bad" commit to internals. Mail is open, forums are
locking in.
I haven't seen any useful forum. If Google/Bing/duckduck send me to a
forum it's always a pain to follow those completely unstructured
discussions (mail has In-Reply-to headers allowing a proper client to
sort/nest accordingly etc.)
johannes
So, I think, it's time to move to a forum.
I hope this is a joke.
so do I ...
--
hartmut
cite: "I hope this is a joke."
i guess that is the stuff they where talking about.
greetings,
daniel
2013/9/11 Johannes Schlüter johannes@schlueters.de
It is based on the fact that there are too many people writing to
internals
and mailing lists are not actually manageable at this level. I stopped
following all the stuff around a year ago, when I started to get like 15
to
30 maillist threads in my inbox daily (hundreds of mails) and too much
noise.Get a better mail client and better mail filters.
So, I think, it's time to move to a forum.
I hope this is a joke.
Actual forum, that can be
managed, can have sections dedicated to certain stuff and has userWe have multiple lists for different things.
management that allows to mute or actually ban people who are not able to
behave, troll and do other kind's of stupid stuff that disrupts the work.We can ban people and have done that twice or so. PHP is open. If people
annoy you, you can filter them out.Many devs are already just ignoring this mailing list, so what is the
point
of having it if relevant people just don't read it?People read what they consider interesting and ignore other threads, and
I assume this here will end in many ignores.The list should remain of course, just to be used as a notification tool
for new important forum threads, RFC's, daily/weekly digest so that those
who have less time can still follow all the stuff in a compact manner.While loosing the structuring proper mail programs offer and having
media breaks - switching between forums and mail.Just a simple examples what mail can do: I can write a mail to the list
an CC the relevant maintainer to draw his attention and he can directly
answer from there. Or I can xpost to bring a discussion from the "CVS"
list, about some "bad" commit to internals. Mail is open, forums are
locking in.I haven't seen any useful forum. If Google/Bing/duckduck send me to a
forum it's always a pain to follow those completely unstructured
discussions (mail has In-Reply-to headers allowing a proper client to
sort/nest accordingly etc.)johannes
On Wednesday 11 September 2013 15:00:33 Daniel Basten wrote:
cite: "I hope this is a joke."
i guess that is the stuff they where talking about.
Yeah. A forum would be much better, this whole thread could just be
moderated shut and invisible after the first message.
Also a forum would avoid the senseless full quoting of previous
messages.
just saying...
Patrick
cite: "I hope this is a joke."
i guess that is the stuff they where talking about.
Not following etiquette is one of the things that annoys people. And you
just violated list etiquette it by top-replying.
Derick
hi Derick,
cite: "I hope this is a joke."
i guess that is the stuff they where talking about.
Not following etiquette is one of the things that annoys people. And you
just violated list etiquette it by top-replying.
Well, as it is right, I would really appreciate if you could simply
post this reminder privately and with some smile and in a more
friendly way. I have seen them so many times as your only reply to
real good posts or answers. That's true to all kind of one liner reply
too btw. especially for long posts or questions. Thanks.
Cheers,
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org
2013/9/11 Johannes Schlüter johannes@schlueters.de
It is based on the fact that there are too many people writing to
internals
and mailing lists are not actually manageable at this level. I stopped
following all the stuff around a year ago, when I started to get like 15
to
30 maillist threads in my inbox daily (hundreds of mails) and too much
noise.Get a better mail client and better mail filters.
Gmail, the best there is on the WEB. I have a lots of filters and labels
setup. Even in this case following the internals is possible if you do it
like full time. Sure, there are quite days, but seriously - when it hits
the fan - it's a mess.
So, I think, it's time to move to a forum.
I hope this is a joke.
Why? At least you can just delete (or mark deleted with the ability to view
if needed) the off topic stuff, move relevant discussions to other threads.
Mailing list will stay in place, it will just get cleaner and be used for,
as it states in the name, for internal stuff. Not discussing stuff that
does not belong in here.
Actual forum, that can be
managed, can have sections dedicated to certain stuff and has userWe have multiple lists for different things.
I know, been here for a long time. See above.
management that allows to mute or actually ban people who are not able to
behave, troll and do other kind's of stupid stuff that disrupts the work.We can ban people and have done that twice or so. PHP is open. If people
annoy you, you can filter them out.
If I would do that, I'll probably filter out like 70% to 90% of the mails
coming from this list: in the long history of this mailing list I think
it's hard to find someone, who has not gone off topic or posted an
occasional annoying e-mail. Even me - that time I was ashamed and if that
was a forum - I'd just delete (or ask to delete) that senseless stupid
message.
Many devs are already just ignoring this mailing list, so what is the
point
of having it if relevant people just don't read it?People read what they consider interesting and ignore other threads, and
I assume this here will end in many ignores.
I care for named params, type hinting and some other stuff. I just dropped
following it when there were like 3 threads going on at the same time,
messages were pouring like crazy and the amount of text just got so
ridiculously big, that I just didn't had the time, ability and will to read
it all. I'd say that that threadnaught, if made on a forum, could be edited
and shrinked like 7 or 8 times for people actually to read something
constructive instead of that monster.
The list should remain of course, just to be used as a notification tool
for new important forum threads, RFC's, daily/weekly digest so that those
who have less time can still follow all the stuff in a compact manner.While loosing the structuring proper mail programs offer and having
media breaks - switching between forums and mail.Just a simple examples what mail can do: I can write a mail to the list
an CC the relevant maintainer to draw his attention and he can directly
answer from there. Or I can xpost to bring a discussion from the "CVS"
list, about some "bad" commit to internals. Mail is open, forums are
locking in.I haven't seen any useful forum. If Google/Bing/duckduck send me to a
forum it's always a pain to follow those completely unstructured
discussions (mail has In-Reply-to headers allowing a proper client to
sort/nest accordingly etc.)
Again, replacing the mailing list is not an option - it definitely has it's
uses. Also, it's a matter of integrating things and what people with
different rights are able to do.
What I'm saying here is that forum can, and if rules are enforced, will
decrease the mailing list noise a lot and push those senseless holy wars of
the mailing list. All the important stuff will still be here. Don't want to
read the forum - be my guest. Anything significant will be pushed into
internals anyway. All the raging and off topic will be left out on the
forum without disturbing your peace.
Forum also has the functionality to follow certain posts - meaning you will
get notifications, if you want to, about the stuff you want to follow.
I know, these are some big changes, need to get used to. But seriously, do
you really believe that going through hundreds of mails just to see what
points have been brought up is easy? People are loosing the context after
10-15 lengthy e-mails, just jump in without reading all the stuff (because
it's just back and forth most of the time with minor, sometimes important,
changes).
P.S. While I was writing this, 4 people posted. Only Patrick Schaaf posted
usefull information. If this would be a forum - those 3 posts should be
marked as off topic and hidden by default.
P.S. While I was writing this, 4 people posted. Only Patrick Schaaf
posted usefull information. If this would be a forum - those 3 posts
should be marked as off topic and hidden by default.
I read this as "I want a censor"
Does this summarize what you want? - I'm clearly objecting to this.
I also don't agree with your other points and to keep the list silent I
won't further comment on that.
johannes
2013/9/11 Johannes Schlüter johannes@schlueters.de
P.S. While I was writing this, 4 people posted. Only Patrick Schaaf
posted usefull information. If this would be a forum - those 3 posts
should be marked as off topic and hidden by default.I read this as "I want a censor"
Does this summarize what you want? - I'm clearly objecting to this.I also don't agree with your other points and to keep the list silent I
won't further comment on that.johannes
Censorship is wrong word here even by a long shot. What community needs is
moderation. Now we have none here - anyone can derail any topic with ease
if he puts his mind to it. Been there, witnessed first hand.
Any big community needs moderation. Any big community needs a place where
all the off topic, holy wars and stuff like that can be directed to without
disturbing the peace. At least on the forum the topic started can aggregate
the feedback and put it into the first message, add changes over time.
I understand the negative moments about the forums, but that's the
management part. Communities manage their forums far better than companies,
it's just a matter of getting people involved, transparency and clear rules
defined.
In less than 10 posts, this thread descended into people bashing each
other. Perhaps that's telling of something.
I won't comment on the point about forums or anything else, but a concern
brought up repeatedly both here and in various blogs is the lack of
direction or vision. There's a conflict between people who want to keep PHP
simple and accessible and people who want to make PHP into a professional
programming tool/environment, complete with all bells and whistles. With
everyone wanting something different and having different ideas on who the
target users are, what PHP's responsibilities and concerns should be, etc.,
it's going to be the classic struggle of trying to be everything for
everybody all at once.
Perhaps that issue really does need to be tackled head-on - and if a
consensus can't be reached, maybe PHP should branch off, having one version
(not necessarily a different codebase) for hobbyists, small sites and
beginners, alongside a professional branch for production environments and
developers who are willing and able to take off the training wheels and
make use of more advanced features, stop relying on the engine to let them
get away with bad habits, etc.
The other classic problem is old-timers who get stuck in their ways and
instantly reject the very notion of change because it will take them out of
their comfort zone - and discourage newcomers who might oust them from
their position of power. Perhaps there's a Machiavellian amongst us who can
help out with that one.
2013/9/11 Terence Copestake terence.copestake@gmail.com
In less than 10 posts, this thread descended into people bashing each
other. Perhaps that's telling of something.I won't comment on the point about forums or anything else, but a concern
brought up repeatedly both here and in various blogs is the lack of
direction or vision. There's a conflict between people who want to keep PHP
simple and accessible and people who want to make PHP into a professional
programming tool/environment, complete with all bells and whistles. With
everyone wanting something different and having different ideas on who the
target users are, what PHP's responsibilities and concerns should be, etc.,
it's going to be the classic struggle of trying to be everything for
everybody all at once.Perhaps that issue really does need to be tackled head-on - and if a
consensus can't be reached, maybe PHP should branch off, having one version
(not necessarily a different codebase) for hobbyists, small sites and
beginners, alongside a professional branch for production environments and
developers who are willing and able to take off the training wheels and
make use of more advanced features, stop relying on the engine to let them
get away with bad habits, etc.The other classic problem is old-timers who get stuck in their ways and
instantly reject the very notion of change because it will take them out of
their comfort zone - and discourage newcomers who might oust them from
their position of power. Perhaps there's a Machiavellian amongst us who can
help out with that one.
Agree on all.
Especially on the last part, seems to me that I just hit that exact spot.
To me, as an observer mostly, something has to be done. Developers can't do
it all by themselves and I don't see that many people willing to step up
and do stuff. I'm not only proposing, but also willing to do my part - I'm
good with organizing stuff, coordinating and did my share of forum
moderation for years.
Terence Copestake wrote:
There's a conflict between people who want to keep PHP
simple and accessible and people who want to make PHP into a professional
programming tool/environment, complete with all bells and whistles.
You see that is part of the problem here. What proportion of the internet is
powered by the current and older versions of PHP? What is 'so wrong' that it's
not already a 'professional tool'? I've been using PHP since just before PHP5
was finalised and I don't find anything wrong with the code I produce using it,
and I am making 'professional' websites and services for 'professionals'.
OK - perhaps I am an 'old timer' stuck in my ways, but programming used to be
fun ... nowadays it's a chore trying to re-write perfectly functional code so
that it jumps through the hoops of what someone else thinks is 'professional' :(
Yes a 'classic' PHP would be nice, rolling back before 'e_strict' and then I
could get back to creating new code rather than fire fighting old stuff.
--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
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
On Sep 11, 2013, at 15:52 , Terence Copestake terence.copestake@gmail.com
wrote:
(.. ) a concern
brought up repeatedly both here and in various blogs is the lack of
direction or vision. There's a conflict between people who want to keep PHP
simple and accessible and people who want to make PHP into a professional
programming tool/environment, complete with all bells and whistles. With
everyone wanting something different and having different ideas on who the
target users are, what PHP's responsibilities and concerns should be, etc.,
it's going to be the classic struggle of trying to be everything for
everybody all at once.
Won't solve the perceived lack of vision, but the conflict could potentially be solved by modeling php language standardization after how they do it at Ecma, w3c or iso.
For instance: Let php-internals be as is, Internal stuff in PHP engine and announcements of rfc's for it, but move out the organization of standardizing the language.
-
The people involved in standardization should be representatives of the different implementations of PHP language.
-
Accepting changes to the language would requirer that at least one implementation have it working behind a compile/runtime flag*
-
Language Tests should be shared and be part of the standardization effort
-
The PHP language standardization body should always allow some variation on how much a implementation helps the user by default
Example: Argument and return type hinting**
Specification on this can define two modes of operation:
1. Fatal error on wrong type
2. Strict error on type conversion, and Fatal error on type conversion with data lossHPHP could then use mode 1 by default, while PHP uses 2 by default (and 2 with strict errors disabled in production).
This was not intended as a flame, best regards
André R.
eZ Systems
- For anyone involved in web development you might know how messy css vendor prefixes made the web, forcing them to be behind compile/runtime flags would avoid this
** Just an example, ignore the details please
Arvids Godjuks wrote:
P.S. While I was writing this, 4 people posted. Only Patrick Schaaf posted
usefull information. If this would be a forum - those 3 posts should be
marked as off topic and hidden by default.
But who decides what is off topic.
There are genuine disagreements as to how PHP should move forward, if someone
has control of the communication channel they can influence what is seen.
I agree with the general sentiment of what is being said, but I recall Rasmus
saying he just wanted stability. I just want to get back to a system I can use ...
--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
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
2013/9/11 Lester Caine lester@lsces.co.uk
Arvids Godjuks wrote:
P.S. While I was writing this, 4 people posted. Only Patrick Schaaf posted
usefull information. If this would be a forum - those 3 posts should be
marked as off topic and hidden by default.But who decides what is off topic.
There are genuine disagreements as to how PHP should move forward, if
someone has control of the communication channel they can influence what is
seen.I agree with the general sentiment of what is being said, but I recall
Rasmus saying he just wanted stability. I just want to get back to a system
I can use ...
Well, I have to answer that, don't I? :)
As I see it, there never is a single moderator - it is usually a team. And
posts are never truly deleted, so if someone has done something bad, it can
be verified and action can be taken.
Off topic is when the content of the message does not relate to the initial
theme of the thread. I usually just go with my gut on these things - you
have to stop the derailment at some point, or you can be forced to clean up
quite a lot. Many times just a reminder to stay on track from the moderator
does the trick - you leave the messages where they are in that case and no
one is hurt.
It's not black and white of course, depends on the situation.
We all want stability, I for once want it badly, because I saw how decent
RFC's and proposals were just shredded to pieces and people just gone "f**c
it, i'm out". We need a filter. That is what i'm proposing.
Le 11/09/2013 16:06, Arvids Godjuks a écrit :
2013/9/11 Lester Caine lester@lsces.co.uk
Arvids Godjuks wrote:
P.S. While I was writing this, 4 people posted. Only Patrick Schaaf posted
usefull information. If this would be a forum - those 3 posts should be
marked as off topic and hidden by default.But who decides what is off topic.
There are genuine disagreements as to how PHP should move forward, if
someone has control of the communication channel they can influence what is
seen.I agree with the general sentiment of what is being said, but I recall
Rasmus saying he just wanted stability. I just want to get back to a system
I can use ...Well, I have to answer that, don't I? :)
As I see it, there never is a single moderator - it is usually a team. And
posts are never truly deleted, so if someone has done something bad, it can
be verified and action can be taken.
Off topic is when the content of the message does not relate to the initial
theme of the thread. I usually just go with my gut on these things - you
have to stop the derailment at some point, or you can be forced to clean up
quite a lot. Many times just a reminder to stay on track from the moderator
does the trick - you leave the messages where they are in that case and no
one is hurt.It's not black and white of course, depends on the situation.
We all want stability, I for once want it badly, because I saw how decent
RFC's and proposals were just shredded to pieces and people just gone "f**c
it, i'm out". We need a filter. That is what i'm proposing.
That's not the first time I mention it, but Discourse
(http://www.discourse.org/) seems like the kind of forum software
appropriate for some of these problems.
It allows:
-
branching off conversations (you all know how this is one of the
biggest problem here) -
community moderation: several people flagging the same reply -> it
gets hidden -
good online interface: I am on the point of view of the readers of
this mailing list, and reading that list is very difficult. It's
either you subscribe and let you personal email get bombarded (we are
not all on gmail), either you use a weird mirror that mixes up all
emails and don't let you distinguish threads and discussions -
easy login (openid): again, if you want to contribute from times to
times to the discussion, you have to subscribe, and that's opening the
gates of hell
They are also working on having it work like a mailing list, i.e.
getting all the posts as mail, and, I think, be able to reply by email also.
Just a reminder: do you know stackoverflow? How it changed the game with
finding answers to technical questions on the web. Well discourse is by
on of the authors, with the same spirit. It seems like very good
software, very far from what "forum" comes to everybody's mind, and
quite appropriate to some of the problems here.
That's not the first time I mention it, but Discourse
(http://www.discourse.org/) seems like the kind of forum software
appropriate for some of these problems.It allows:
branching off conversations (you all know how this is one of the biggest
problem here)community moderation: several people flagging the same reply -> it gets
hiddengood online interface: I am on the point of view of the readers of this
mailing list, and reading that list is very difficult. It's either you
subscribe and let you personal email get bombarded (we are not all on
gmail), either you use a weird mirror that mixes up all emails and don't let
you distinguish threads and discussionseasy login (openid): again, if you want to contribute from times to times
to the discussion, you have to subscribe, and that's opening the gates of
hellThey are also working on having it work like a mailing list, i.e. getting
all the posts as mail, and, I think, be able to reply by email also.Just a reminder: do you know stackoverflow? How it changed the game with
finding answers to technical questions on the web. Well discourse is by on
of the authors, with the same spirit. It seems like very good software, very
far from what "forum" comes to everybody's mind, and quite appropriate to
some of the problems here.
Please move this discussion to another thread / topic as this is off-topic.
Florin Patan
https://github.com/dlsniper
http://www.linkedin.com/in/florinpatan
Am 11.09.2013 14:46, schrieb Johannes Schlüter:
So, I think, it's time to move to a forum.
I hope this is a joke.
+1. A forum is a no go for me.
A forum is merely a medium, and even if the community would be able to
moderate message, I still foresee a problem.
As long as the community remains hostile to newcomers, moderation
would be hostile as well. Take for example the situation on Stack
Overflow's PHP tag. Hardened by a tidal wave of crap content, PHP high
rep users (a.k.a. "The Moderators"), aggressively close and delete bad
content, often without giving OP indication of his wrongdoing,
sometimes via automated comments.
It's not their (ours, I'm part of it) fault, that's a natural process
that happens when too much low content material arrives at a
moderator's doorstep.
However, the problem in my eyes remains the lack of proper leadership
and vision. Even open source projects need a team head and/or a
leader, you know. Even mailing lists needs to have an active
moderator, that's capable of making the cool, hard decisions without
pushing his own agendas. As long as internals don't have any of those
(You may say you have them, I don't see it in practice, sorry. A
moderator and a leader needs to show presence and authority).
I'm mostly a lurker, reading around whenever possible, rarely
answering. However, you're really off-track here with trying to come
up with technical solutions such as a new medium for internals, or
some sort of system. The community itself needs to change. If it
doesn't do that, nothing will ever change, regardless of how you
change your color scheme.
Am 11.09.2013 14:46, schrieb Johannes Schlüter:
So, I think, it's time to move to a forum.
I hope this is a joke.
+1. A forum is a no go for me.
As long as the community remains hostile to newcomers, moderation
would be hostile as well.
Sorry, I don't believe in this "hostile" argument. Yes people have
strong opinions and aren't not necessarily diplomatic while stating them
(for all different reasons like Ego, care for the product, language
barriers, cultural background, pure opinion, ...) but still we gave out
35 new git accounts (not only php-src) within the first 9 months of this
year.
Internals can be loud and harsh, as it is about the core which is
important for many, but look to the side, like pecl-dev list or
#php.pecl they are mostly helpful towards people who try to learn about
php-src. (at least I hope so, while trying to answer as many beginner
questions as I can in my available time)
johannes
A forum is merely a medium, and even if the community would be able to
moderate message, I still foresee a problem.As long as the community remains hostile to newcomers, moderation
would be hostile as well. Take for example the situation on Stack
Overflow's PHP tag. Hardened by a tidal wave of crap content, PHP high
rep users (a.k.a. "The Moderators"), aggressively close and delete bad
content, often without giving OP indication of his wrongdoing,
sometimes via automated comments.It's not their (ours, I'm part of it) fault, that's a natural process
that happens when too much low content material arrives at a
moderator's doorstep.However, the problem in my eyes remains the lack of proper leadership
and vision. Even open source projects need a team head and/or a
leader, you know. Even mailing lists needs to have an active
moderator, that's capable of making the cool, hard decisions without
pushing his own agendas. As long as internals don't have any of those
(You may say you have them, I don't see it in practice, sorry. A
moderator and a leader needs to show presence and authority).I'm mostly a lurker, reading around whenever possible, rarely
answering. However, you're really off-track here with trying to come
up with technical solutions such as a new medium for internals, or
some sort of system. The community itself needs to change. If it
doesn't do that, nothing will ever change, regardless of how you
change your color scheme.
First, I didn't said anything about attitude to new comers. For me it
was quite well and people offered to help out in solving issues.
Second, if you read the posting rules of this mailing list, top
posting is one of those things that you should avoid.
Given the following factors:
- lack of clear language scope: yes we build webpages but guess what,
we aren't doing blogs for a long time ago. if you dimiss Wikipedia,
Facebook and some other sily sites in the top 100 hits / month that
use PHP you are given a whole slew of startups and some of them even
businesses which are using PHP. Some of them might even prefer to have
in-house developed tools but then for those tools PHP says: sorry, you
should check another language if you want this or that. It's simply
frustrating :) - lack of a clear roadmap: as I said earlier, can someone really tell
what's in the next two versions of php from now - lack of clear authority - who can and should steer discussions to a
desired path and stop trolling (even by core devs) - lack of actual feedback from the community on topics/rfcs: there's
always a 'but people need/want/don't need/don't want' with no concrete
way to really gauge what the community position really is - lack of clear documentation about the internals: you really can't
tell me that the docs out there are clear because I did a bunch of
searching for them and I'm pretty good at finding stuff - personal feelings on a subject instead or rational ones
Conclusion, it's the process that has issues and people are drove off
sooner or later by it and that's what we should prevent and improve.
@Jordi
Internals mailing lists rules say to break silence when you have
something to say and that's what I've did. Like it or not this is the
truth and if everyone knows it and nobody says it / does something to
change things, even if it's just starting a discussion as useless as
this, then maybe the community members shouldn't be part of the
decision process of that community.
Kind regards
Florin Patan
https://github.com/dlsniper
http://www.linkedin.com/in/florinpatan
First, I didn't said anything about attitude to new comers. For me it
was quite well and people offered to help out in solving issues.
Thanks.
Second, if you read the posting rules of this mailing list, top
posting is one of those things that you should avoid.Given the following factors:
- lack of clear language scope: yes we build webpages but guess what,
we aren't doing blogs for a long time ago. if you dimiss Wikipedia,
Facebook and some other sily sites in the top 100 hits / month that
use PHP you are given a whole slew of startups and some of them even
businesses which are using PHP. Some of them might even prefer to have
in-house developed tools but then for those tools PHP says: sorry, you
should check another language if you want this or that. It's simply
frustrating :)
Facebook is not using PHP but HipHop. Weblogs and small sites are still
a big part of the user base (shared hosters still seem to see enough
market to battle in that market, I know different "web agencies" serving
those).
- lack of a clear roadmap: as I said earlier, can someone really tell
what's in the next two versions of php from now
... and never will. I commented on that in a different mail.
- lack of clear authority - who can and should steer discussions to a
desired path and stop trolling (even by core devs)
A troll has no respect on authority. The community at large has to
handle that.
- lack of actual feedback from the community on topics/rfcs: there's
always a 'but people need/want/don't need/don't want' with no concrete
way to really gauge what the community position really is
“Nobody knows what most PHP programmers do.”
- Bjarne Stroustrup (inventor of C++, parapharsed)
There is no single community, there are wikipedia and yahoo and such
(which itself aren't homogeneous entities), there are wordpress users,
there are small special interest forums, there people just learning
programming, using it on intranet sites, ...
This actually is the cause for the discussions here - everybody here
lives in a different world, facing different challenges.
- lack of clear documentation about the internals: you really can't
tell me that the docs out there are clear because I did a bunch of
searching for them and I'm pretty good at finding stuff
What specifically do you need? I often hear this abstract comment. Often
these either are very specialized questions or lack of C knowledge or
such.
- personal feelings on a subject instead or rational ones
Depending on what kind of challenges you are coming from you rank
requirements differently. This impacts"rationalism". If you want a jack
of all trades language you rank additions differently from when you are
aiming for a beginner-friendly language, which you value differently
from when you put BC first, ...
That said: Not all arguments are good, but often a disagreement here
comes from different views colliding, which, to some degree, is healthy
in order to find the right path working for as many users as possible.
joahnnes
Hi Johannes,
I do understand motivations behind keeping core simple and stable that
majority of internals always promote. I also understand the majority of
user base is on shared host.
But as a counterpart, what about large agencies that do want to extract
every single feature PHP has to provide?
That's the part it sounds blurry. Which side should PHP take? Trying to
keep both sides happy is becoming more and more
difficult along the years.
Who would make this decision? What is gonna happen with the other side?
Someone needs to address this.
Why don't we reevaluate all highlighted topics provided on that
StackOverflow thread (use my comment as base) as it was done in that 2005
Paris meeting? That should be a great start for ZE3.
From the personal side, I truly agree with this thread. I tried 5 times to
contribute to internals, all of them generated endless flames, and even
RFCs where over 50% was pro the support, I got an answer like "most core
devs were against it, so no". I'm pretty much on Anthony's side.
Thanks,
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Johannes Schlüter
johannes@schlueters.dewrote:
First, I didn't said anything about attitude to new comers. For me it
was quite well and people offered to help out in solving issues.Thanks.
Second, if you read the posting rules of this mailing list, top
posting is one of those things that you should avoid.Given the following factors:
- lack of clear language scope: yes we build webpages but guess what,
we aren't doing blogs for a long time ago. if you dimiss Wikipedia,
Facebook and some other sily sites in the top 100 hits / month that
use PHP you are given a whole slew of startups and some of them even
businesses which are using PHP. Some of them might even prefer to have
in-house developed tools but then for those tools PHP says: sorry, you
should check another language if you want this or that. It's simply
frustrating :)Facebook is not using PHP but HipHop. Weblogs and small sites are still
a big part of the user base (shared hosters still seem to see enough
market to battle in that market, I know different "web agencies" serving
those).
- lack of a clear roadmap: as I said earlier, can someone really tell
what's in the next two versions of php from now... and never will. I commented on that in a different mail.
- lack of clear authority - who can and should steer discussions to a
desired path and stop trolling (even by core devs)A troll has no respect on authority. The community at large has to
handle that.
- lack of actual feedback from the community on topics/rfcs: there's
always a 'but people need/want/don't need/don't want' with no concrete
way to really gauge what the community position really is“Nobody knows what most PHP programmers do.” - Bjarne Stroustrup (inventor of C++, parapharsed)
There is no single community, there are wikipedia and yahoo and such
(which itself aren't homogeneous entities), there are wordpress users,
there are small special interest forums, there people just learning
programming, using it on intranet sites, ...This actually is the cause for the discussions here - everybody here
lives in a different world, facing different challenges.
- lack of clear documentation about the internals: you really can't
tell me that the docs out there are clear because I did a bunch of
searching for them and I'm pretty good at finding stuffWhat specifically do you need? I often hear this abstract comment. Often
these either are very specialized questions or lack of C knowledge or
such.
- personal feelings on a subject instead or rational ones
Depending on what kind of challenges you are coming from you rank
requirements differently. This impacts"rationalism". If you want a jack
of all trades language you rank additions differently from when you are
aiming for a beginner-friendly language, which you value differently
from when you put BC first, ...That said: Not all arguments are good, but often a disagreement here
comes from different views colliding, which, to some degree, is healthy
in order to find the right path working for as many users as possible.joahnnes
--
--
Guilherme Blanco
MSN: guilhermeblanco@hotmail.com
GTalk: guilhermeblanco
Toronto - ON/Canada
- lack of a clear roadmap: as I said earlier, can someone really tell
what's in the next two versions of php from now
That's never going to happen. We don't have paid developers that we can
assign tasks to. We have volunteers who work on things they need or find
fun to work on. We can't possibly provide a solid road map two (I assume
you mean major) versions out.
The process is clearly described here:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/releaseprocess
When it comes time to do the next release we look at the state of the
various projects/rfcs and we, led by the released manager, decide which
features are far enough along to go into that release. Saying that a
certain feature will be in a release 2 years from now without knowing
whether the person championing it will still be around just isn't
realistic. Plus interesting ideas come up all the time, and a solid
2-year road map would mean there would be at least a 2-year delay on
anything new.
We do have a fuzzy road map in the form of the set of RFCs on the wiki.
A subset of those are likely to be in the next release. And to influence
that, instead of writing lots of long email threads on internals,
contact the author of the RFC you are interested in and ask them if they
need help with anything.
And yes, even very complete RFCs may still get shot down for a number of
different reasons. PHP is quite mature, and major new features are going
to face a lot of friction. This is not a bad thing. I often wish that
some of the things I put in years ago had had a bit more friction. But
there was nobody around to provide that friction. Now we have the luxury
of a lot of experienced people with a wealth of ideas and opinions to
provide this friction.
-Rasmus
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
That's never going to happen. We don't have paid developers that we can
assign tasks to. We have volunteers who work on things they need or find
fun to work on. We can't possibly provide a solid road map two (I assume
you mean major) versions out.
The conflict here is the modern plan to allow major version updates a lot more
often than in the past. On one hand I can understand that people get frustrated
that things are not changing quick enough but similarly there are those of us
who prefer stability over flashy new 'features'. I know I keep banging on about
'PHP6', but surely it is now time to nail down the PHP5 developments and start
with a clean sheet of paper for PHP6? That I feel would make many of us happy
and alleviate a lot of the current animosity? Alright we can simply stop at what
I will call a minor version bump ... PHP5.4 ... but there is not enough support
for a stable minor version. These major/minor updates are simply happening too
often for some of us to cope with. Certainly the re-instigation of many features
which were turned down in the past would suggest that a second stream would make
sense?
--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
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
Why not both?
The list should and will remain, but I see no issue in using the same
inbox to start/reply-to a thread; it's been done, it can be done!
And I don't think it's just about keeping people who like one or the
other more, but rather allowing a quick read over the conversation in
a threaded conversation when my main e-mail client isn't available
(not that gmail is THAT terrible with the threaded conversations)
But I think this is a secondary question to the more relevant "is the
PHP internals mailing, RFC process, «not the PHP way» discussions,
etc" working out positively for the language, the (internals)
developers and web developers at large.
And please don't just cite the PHP usage numbers, I think those more
involved know it's a more complex matter than only that...
The way I see Anthony's response wasn't because of that particular
discussion, but the last drop of a continuous number of inefficient
communication or just a bit of bad taste when defending X view within
a discussion.
I also have to agree with having the more prominent "PHP Companies"
being part of the process (and improving it if possible) as well as
outsiders (be it FB or others) being included in a more friendly and
productive discussion. Along with a vision for the long term. (Rasmus,
I don't think this is so much a roadmap, as it is a need for simply a
vision as broad as can be)
Or as Rodney King put it: Why can't we all just get along?
Cheers :)
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
That's never going to happen. We don't have paid developers that we can
assign tasks to. We have volunteers who work on things they need or find
fun to work on. We can't possibly provide a solid road map two (I assume
you mean major) versions out.The conflict here is the modern plan to allow major version updates a lot
more often than in the past. On one hand I can understand that people get
frustrated that things are not changing quick enough but similarly there are
those of us who prefer stability over flashy new 'features'. I know I keep
banging on about 'PHP6', but surely it is now time to nail down the PHP5
developments and start with a clean sheet of paper for PHP6? That I feel
would make many of us happy and alleviate a lot of the current animosity?
Alright we can simply stop at what I will call a minor version bump ...
PHP5.4 ... but there is not enough support for a stable minor version. These
major/minor updates are simply happening too often for some of us to cope
with. Certainly the re-instigation of many features which were turned down
in the past would suggest that a second stream would make sense?--
Lester Caine - G8HFLContact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
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--
Just by looking at the features that are coming to PHP 5.6 I think all
the community will get plenty of features to work with in the future.
Thanks to the help from Nikita and Sara, I'll also submit soon another
(proper) RFC for return type hinting / return typing which along with
parameter changes parameters, function autoloading (I still hope
Anthony will change his mind and come back to finish things properly)
so yes, I'll be one of the contributors, if the RFC is accepted. I'd
be ready to support it in the future as well but at least for the time
being I have to rely on help to get things done.
That said, maybe after 5.6 release it would be a good time to have a
meeting and talk about future PHP versions and how we get there? I can
suggest Berlin as a place to do it, there's plenty of activity here,
lots of startups using PHP and a pretty nice city.
Until that, could we consider making a poll on the website to let the
users vote for their feature changes and so we can really gauge what
the community that uses PHP wants / needs?
Kind regards
Florin Patan
https://github.com/dlsniper
http://www.linkedin.com/in/florinpatan
Florin Patan wrote:
That said, maybe after 5.6 release it would be a good time to have a
meeting and talk about future PHP versions and how we get there? I can
suggest Berlin as a place to do it, there's plenty of activity here,
lots of startups using PHP and a pretty nice city.
You see that I think is taking the core far too much further than I'm even
interested in, so I end up managing a PHP5.4 freeze along side a PHP5.5/6 system
which contains considerable incompatible changes, so I need two versions of the
third party libraries and then you add PHP6 into the mix.
"Ask the audience" seems an ideal solution, but I fear that not enough people
will respond.
--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
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
- lack of a clear roadmap: as I said earlier, can someone really tell
what's in the next two versions of php from nowThat's never going to happen. We don't have paid developers that we can
assign tasks to. We have volunteers who work on things they need or find
fun to work on. We can't possibly provide a solid road map two (I assume
you mean major) versions out.The process is clearly described here:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/releaseprocess
When it comes time to do the next release we look at the state of the
various projects/rfcs and we, led by the released manager, decide which
features are far enough along to go into that release. Saying that a
certain feature will be in a release 2 years from now without knowing
whether the person championing it will still be around just isn't
realistic. Plus interesting ideas come up all the time, and a solid
2-year road map would mean there would be at least a 2-year delay on
anything new.We do have a fuzzy road map in the form of the set of RFCs on the wiki.
A subset of those are likely to be in the next release. And to influence
that, instead of writing lots of long email threads on internals,
contact the author of the RFC you are interested in and ask them if they
need help with anything.And yes, even very complete RFCs may still get shot down for a number of
different reasons. PHP is quite mature, and major new features are going
to face a lot of friction. This is not a bad thing. I often wish that
some of the things I put in years ago had had a bit more friction. But
there was nobody around to provide that friction. Now we have the luxury
of a lot of experienced people with a wealth of ideas and opinions to
provide this friction.-Rasmus
I fully agree with you, every thing that goes in a programming
language that is used at this scale should be properly verified /
checked / questioned before saying: yes, merge it.
But at some point this friction leads to people saying things that are
not true about the internals or contributors / potential contributors
to leave. The later is even worst given the fact that there's only a
dozen or so, iirc, of stable core contributors. New comers will see
this as a bad place instead of trying to understand why that happened
as it's easier to see the negative side that the cause or the positive
side.
Below is my personal experience so far and why I started this.
The mentality I see in the companies / people that are using PHP is
that they long passed the stage where they need a simple website /
presentation platform. If we look at the ecosystem right now, we have:
- Wordpress: used from blogs to presentation websites to simple
personal shop sites. Could improve on architecture / code but it's
already too huge and too late to do it without burdening the users
with endless hours of changes - Magento & co. for the sales part, which could again improve on
architecture but it's a work in progress with Magento 2 iirc, again,
big people lots of stores using it - Drupal & rest of CMS software that are better built and people turn
to them to build more 'professional'/corporate websites - custom sites / applications / backends : most of the career I've
been doing just that so I know a thing or two here. People expect
things to go fast, be clean, bug free and be developed in a blink of
an eye, if possible. Apps here are long gone from the simple
presentation website, Wordpress style blogs, Drupal or Magento setups. - frameworks, ORMs and other tools: the land that's supporting most of
the above eco-system. Be it a in-house framework or Zend Framework
2/Symfony2/... they all get bigger and bigger, add more things that
users need to build all of the above. They need to be fast, easy to
understand, bug free, lightweight and so on. - people who are not in any of the above sections: that's something
that I can't speak of, I don't really have contact with things out of
the above points, please help out with use cases.
As for people who work in those ecosystems and their requirements /
expectations:
- when you start with something simple PHP is a great tool. You can
actually code in a couple of hours something that's displayed on
interwebs - then you move to do a small website, non-profit. PHP is still a good tool.
- as the site evolves into something bigger: you get into already
built systems, Wordpress / Drupal or even frameworks. PHP starts to
okish - if you go business/selling you go Magento / similar and you start
require more things from PHP, still okish - if the business/site you're working on grows bigger and bigger it's
time for a custom solution. It requires time, skills and PHP starts to
show it's uglier sides - then you go frameworks which help you build all of the above:
there's thing you want to do, users expects from you but if you do
them PHP can really slow you down either in development or even worst,
in speed. When you start having a slow framework, nobody new will use
you anymore, and people will look for something else which in turn
will become slow again.
I'm not saying always make framework people happy and everyone will be
happy but unless you're working with legacy code which hasn't seen the
light of PHP 5 ever, chances are your code will use a framework.
From the definition of PHP http://php.net/manual/en/intro-whatis.php
we get that PHP is a "general-purpose scripting language that is
especially suited for web development". Web development has shifted a
huge deal since 200x. I dare to say, it shifted a lot from 2011 even,
with the emerge of new framework wave. It took them about 1-2 years to
come out and use namespaces and so on but they also added a great deal
of new ways to think / write code for PHP developers.
Granted, I've been changing around jobs a couple of times in the past
years but it's all based on what I've seen in companies that range
from small to big, from nation wide number one online store to
multi-country stores to worldwide mobile applications.
And yes, internals are very friendly when it comes to helping people
out, I'll say it again, I haven't see someone asking a question and
not receiving at least one answer but when it comes to changes to the
language.. that's another story.
That's why I think it's the time to reevaluate the priorities in PHP,
how it communicates itself to the world and have a clear mission in
mind.
Granted, having a roadmap is a hard thing, especially with non-payed
contributors to the language but we might just as well as a call for
vote on the reasons why companies that are using PHP don't provide
more help to core. There's a bunch of conferences where people attend,
companies send their employees that we could use as a reference. We
could use php.net to gather more input from them.
And yes, I'm not in a position where I could do this, mainly because I
haven't gain some random e-pen standard that people are using to
choose if they listen to people or not but I'm sure that there are
members here who could make their voice heard on these matters and
I'll be helping out each idea that comes out and needs help as best as
possible to the extent of my skills.
Kind regards
Florin Patan
https://github.com/dlsniper
http://www.linkedin.com/in/florinpatan
Florin Patan florinpatan@gmail.com schrieb:
- lack of clear documentation about the internals: you really can't
tell me that the docs out there are clear because I did a bunch of
searching for them and I'm pretty good at finding stuff
You are welcome to improve the documentation and make it easier for
people to get into internals.
Well said, Florin. :)
I'm not a core contributor, I never have been and probably never will be as
I don't know C... but I do follow internals quite keenly. It strikes me
that the biggest problem here is that there's no one entity to decide the
rules of the road, so everything (including the rules as to how things
should work,) has to be decided by committee - but the committee is too big
and too diverse to be useful.
If you look at other big open source projects, there's usually a person or
group that sets the ground rules for contributions and as long as everyone
plays by those rules, contribution is easy, rewarding and painless. Take
Blink for example, Google defined the rules but now Intel, Opera, and so on
all play nicely together with very little friction.
Blink seems to have a really good framework for contribution; Instead of X%
of contributors having to agree, they provide an "intent to implement"
framework to seek feedback on an idea, and an "intent to ship" framework to
seek approval from three relevant code owners - the people that know the
most about the section of code your patch affects. This seems to allow for
rapid innovation whilst protecting the codebase from fly-by patches.
Could something like that work for PHP? And, perhaps more importantly,
would the PHP core contributors be open to a person/group being appointed
to lay down these ground rules? It could work on a time-restricted basis
akin to the release manager role.
- having a RFC to make a language change requires to have a patch
which if you don't know C and internals you got no chance of doing.
Well, so what should happen? An RFC without patch is accepted and then?
Somebody has to write a patch at some time. Whom of the people spending
their free time do you want to force to do that even though they might
not be interested in the feature?
Getting a patch first
* proves feasibility (yes, I love saying "It's just software
everything is possible" ... but then there's always a "BUT")
* shows technical consequences of a feature
* shows that there is somebody who is interested in developing AND
probably maintaining the patch (if somebody with a good idea can
not convince a single developer how will this be maintained?)
* allows users to actually test a feature and find problems which
might not be that obvious from theoretical examples
Yes writing a good patch can be lots of effort, and it might be dumped,
but for most features the initial patches aren't that big.
And if you do know C, PHP internals will drain the soul out of you
before doing something
Comparing PHP with other C projects I've seen the code isn't as bad as
many people make it sound. Sure we have some "weird" macros, but for
many of those: What's the alternative? (C++11 would allow some
improvements here and there but create a whole lot of other issues) Sure
we have some creepy areas: That happens, when a project grows over more
than 15 years, when sometimes not so good developers add things,
sometimes people try to optimise things for performance and often try to
keep a good BC story (even on internal APIs) But overall PHP is a
modular quite structured code base.
- there were patches proposed by Facebook, and others, that are / were
rejected, delayed or ignored. Who heard of Facebook anyway, they have
just one website with a billion users probably running on a a couple
of Galaxy Note 3 and 2-3 iPhone 6 as a load balancers, my cat can do
better I tell you.
Facebook has active contributors who can push anything and know most
"core" people well enough. If anything they want is falling under the
floor they probably don't want it that much. Also mind: Facebook is
one usecase. Not everything which is good for them is necissarily good
for other users. And we have a multitude of users. Some want afast and
slick platform, some want many advanced features, some want it to be
simple. What we have to do is to find the "right" line ... oh, and mind
they are not using PHP but hipHop.
Where Zend | The PHP Company? It's their name, no? They are making
money out of PHP brand, certifications and training?
So can you. So do others.
They've added the opcode cache and that was the single biggest thing
they've did in 7 years? Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
They are active in fixing bugs and improving the performance and other
things. Sure they are not propose many new features but maybe (I'm an
outsider and can only speculate) they have noticed that with a fast
enough platform offering lots of language features you don't have to do
all things in the core but can build the environment around the core
language by building frameworks and tools and benefit the platform more
in that way. (while also making it simpler to develop and ease
participation as each framework user should now PHP and can therefore
help with the framework) but having said that: Ask Zend, not this list,
if you want something from Zend.
This all said: I agree that some structures here are bad and might be
improved but mind one thing: This community is quite open (everybody can
subscribe to this list and participate, and often git accounts are
thrown out relatively fast) which leads to a quite heterogeneous field
of people all having different interests and aims (as I mentioned above
already), you criticize this as "missing vision", one can see the same
thing as "too many independent visions" - everybody here has a reason
and goal of some kind for his/her contributions. Aligning them all the
time is tough and requires compromises. Constantly. But you won't find a
single vision which a majority would support and which wouldn't drive
too many contributors away while still deserving to be called a vision.
johannes
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Johannes Schlüter
johannes@schlueters.de wrote:
- having a RFC to make a language change requires to have a patch
which if you don't know C and internals you got no chance of doing.Well, so what should happen? An RFC without patch is accepted and then?
Somebody has to write a patch at some time. Whom of the people spending
their free time do you want to force to do that even though they might
not be interested in the feature?Getting a patch first
* proves feasibility (yes, I love saying "It's just software everything is possible" ... but then there's always a "BUT") * shows technical consequences of a feature * shows that there is somebody who is interested in developing AND probably maintaining the patch (if somebody with a good idea can not convince a single developer how will this be maintained?) * allows users to actually test a feature and find problems which might not be that obvious from theoretical examples
Yes writing a good patch can be lots of effort, and it might be dumped,
but for most features the initial patches aren't that big.
Agreed and I respect that but if PHP doesn't provide the framework to
enable people to contribute to it then how do you expect to have
someone to maintain it? If it's a pita to do something simple, as you
say, then there's really no incentive for people to help out. And
coding around like a headless chicken can and will result in potential
bugs that might not be obvious even when people will review it then
what?
As a note, I've asked Sara and Nikita for help with the return type
hinting for functions/methods patch before the official RFC, which I
hope I'll be able to finish sometime soon but if a RFC like that would
be approved and posted on a roadmap then a core dev or a newcomer
(like me) pick it up and try to work on it. When deadline for feature
freeze comes and some approved RFCs are not done then the devs should
implement them then proceed with bug fixing and testing like usual. It
would mean a larger feature freeze window and people willing to work
on features that they don't propose.
Look at the current PDO stack. Does anyone maintain it?
Yes/No/Maybe... What will happen with the changes added by Anthony in
5.5 now that he left? Someone will assume the role of maintainer for
them? In a good open-source way there should be a maintainer that's
named by the group but everyone should be able to fix them given the
right tools.
There's also little to no documentation on how to setup your work
environment for developing something for PHP, I've started to do
something about that but it's not like I'm a experienced user in
this....
And if you do know C, PHP internals will drain the soul out of you
before doing somethingComparing PHP with other C projects I've seen the code isn't as bad as
many people make it sound. Sure we have some "weird" macros, but for
many of those: What's the alternative? (C++11 would allow some
improvements here and there but create a whole lot of other issues) Sure
we have some creepy areas: That happens, when a project grows over more
than 15 years, when sometimes not so good developers add things,
sometimes people try to optimise things for performance and often try to
keep a good BC story (even on internal APIs) But overall PHP is a
modular quite structured code base.
Funny thing is that I'm comparing the C code of PHP with code written
in PHP, take Symfony2 or Zend Framework 2 or all the other new
libraries and frameworks since 1-2 years ago. For most of them, anyone
can contribute to code in a couple of hours for minor / medium things
and for more complex ones it can take more. In PHP you don't have a
clear structure, you don't have documentation in sources, there's no
documentation on how to follow the execution of PHP from where it
starts to parse a file to where it starts to write the output to the
webserver. You have to dig it out from various sources scattered over
the Internet and from some old articles from 2006.
And yes, once you get to understand something about the architecture
of PHP itself then you can start to say it's ok but the learning curve
is very big.
- there were patches proposed by Facebook, and others, that are / were
rejected, delayed or ignored. Who heard of Facebook anyway, they have
just one website with a billion users probably running on a a couple
of Galaxy Note 3 and 2-3 iPhone 6 as a load balancers, my cat can do
better I tell you.Facebook has active contributors who can push anything and know most
"core" people well enough. If anything they want is falling under the
floor they probably don't want it that much. Also mind: Facebook is
one usecase. Not everything which is good for them is necissarily good
for other users. And we have a multitude of users. Some want afast and
slick platform, some want many advanced features, some want it to be
simple. What we have to do is to find the "right" line ... oh, and mind
they are not using PHP but hipHop.
Facebook is one example that quickly came to my mind. Indeed some of
their use cases might not be applicable to the majority of users.
Where Zend | The PHP Company? It's their name, no? They are making
money out of PHP brand, certifications and training?So can you. So do others.
I thought I can't use the PHP name without the PHP permission. Also
I'm making money out of it as programmer but the money was not the
point.
They've added the opcode cache and that was the single biggest thing
they've did in 7 years? Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.They are active in fixing bugs and improving the performance and other
things. Sure they are not propose many new features but maybe (I'm an
outsider and can only speculate) they have noticed that with a fast
enough platform offering lots of language features you don't have to do
all things in the core but can build the environment around the core
language by building frameworks and tools and benefit the platform more
in that way. (while also making it simpler to develop and ease
participation as each framework user should now PHP and can therefore
help with the framework) but having said that: Ask Zend, not this list,
if you want something from Zend.
I'm asking this list to consider either asking Zend or some other
entity to be more involved in actual language decisions / roadmaps.
Do you know what will PHP 5.6 have in it? How about 5.7? Will there
even be one? Or we'll finally start thinking of having Zend Engine 3 +
PHP 6?
This all said: I agree that some structures here are bad and might be
improved but mind one thing: This community is quite open (everybody can
subscribe to this list and participate, and often git accounts are
thrown out relatively fast) which leads to a quite heterogeneous field
of people all having different interests and aims (as I mentioned above
already), you criticize this as "missing vision", one can see the same
thing as "too many independent visions" - everybody here has a reason
and goal of some kind for his/her contributions. Aligning them all the
time is tough and requires compromises. Constantly. But you won't find a
single vision which a majority would support and which wouldn't drive
too many contributors away while still deserving to be called a vision.johannes
But maybe that's the point. We should have only one vision not none or
many. Look at GO, Python, Ruby, Java, C or whatever. They seem to be
fine with that, no?
Look at the list here:
http://www.reddit.com/r/PHP/comments/1iw0cj/what_would_you_change_about_php_if_you_could/cb9rzw4
I think all of them would be nice to have in PHP for us, the common
PHP programmers, and maybe for the core devs here as well.
Even with that list in mind, there's no clear way to do it. The core
devs are so few that they are, for good reason, against a total
redoing of PHP. The new people can't turn into core devs unless
someone holds their hands for a while and then they either leave, see
Anthony, @lsmith and others, either don't want to change anything
anymore either start not to care.
And just look how off-topic this went into discussing for the nth time
if PHP should move to a forum instead of mailing list. If there should
be moderation in that or not. If core devs would be happier if noobs
wouldn't interfere with their work and so on. Having a clear
structure, a good framework to enable people to contribute would solve
maybe half of them only but would still be a good chunk of issues that
wouldn't need to be addressed by core devs in the first place anyway.
Florin Patan
https://github.com/dlsniper
http://www.linkedin.com/in/florinpatan
There's also little to no documentation on how to setup your work
environment for developing something for PHP, I've started to do
something about that but it's not like I'm a experienced user in
this....
Issue 1: There is no single work environment. People use different
operating systems, compilers, debuggers, editors, ...
http://php.net/git.php lists some things developers need,
php.net/install tells how to compile it.
Yes, that can be streamlined, but the tool choices above we can't make
and a tutorial on gdb also is out of scope.
I was once writing a few chapters for http://php.net/internals2 but that
got somewhat stalled, this should be the place to document PHPisms
though.
Funny thing is that I'm comparing the C code of PHP with code written
in PHP, take Symfony2 or Zend Framework 2 or all the other new
libraries and frameworks since 1-2 years ago. For most of them, anyone
can contribute to code in a couple of hours for minor / medium things
and for more complex ones it can take more.
Yes that is funny ;-)
PHP and C are different languages, they use different paradigms and have
different approaches. If you have no experience in C it can be steep, if
you have you will recognize many things.
put in another way: For contributing to symfony you have to know the
service container structures to contribute, for PHP you have to know
your way around macros and function pointer tables.
In PHP you don't have a
clear structure, you don't have documentation in sources, there's no
documentation on how to follow the execution of PHP from where it
starts to parse a file to where it starts to write the output to the
webserver. You have to dig it out from various sources scattered over
the Internet and from some old articles from 2006.And yes, once you get to understand something about the architecture
of PHP itself then you can start to say it's ok but the learning curve
is very big.
You have to know that the "Zend Engine" in Zend/ drives it and decipher
SAPI as Server API. Within Zend/ most files give a good indication on
what they do, as do the directory names in SAPI.
And how steep the learning curve is, I don't know. It took me a night
about 10 years ago from my first look at the engine source till I had
operator overloading implemented in a simple way. (I was lucky so as
zend_operators.h sounded quite lie a place I had to touch, and
zend_lanuage_scanner.l/parser.y was easy enough too)
I wouldn't expect anybody to come in and being able to directly
implement anonymous classes or such. The learning path imo should be to
first write an extension for some lib or something. doing this is
relatively well documented in books and examples etc. but gives some
entrance and from there dig further.
Where Zend | The PHP Company? It's their name, no? They are making
money out of PHP brand, certifications and training?So can you. So do others.
I thought I can't use the PHP name without the PHP permission. Also
I'm making money out of it as programmer but the money was not the
point.
It's complicated but PHP is no registered trademark. I also know that
The PHP Group, which holds PHP's rights, approved different name usages.
Not 100% matching but related:
http://www.php.net/license/index.php#faq-lic
http://www.php.net/download-logos.php
I'm asking this list to consider either asking Zend or some other
entity to be more involved in actual language decisions / roadmaps.
Why should I ask a company with their business interest to do that?
Do you know what will PHP 5.6 have in it? How about 5.7? Will there
even be one? Or we'll finally start thinking of having Zend Engine 3 +
PHP 6?
Well, a roadmap would be nice. But that requires that we can actually
rely on it. Mind that most here are doing this (partly) besides their
jobs. There are so many things that can happen that people promise to
work on stuff but then change jobs, get a girl/boyfriend, a child,
illness, ...
Other projects make stronger promises by having companies which can
"replace" people, but PHP is driven by people not companies (in my
personal opinion for good reasons)
And even with languages where companies are stronger involved roadmaps
mean little already: Java modules were pushed from Java7 to Java 8, and
now were pushed to Java 9. In C++ modules were dropped from C++0x (which
became C++11) and won't be there for C++14 unlike, hopefully, Concepts
which were planned for C++0x, too.
But maybe that's the point. We should have only one vision not none or
many. Look at GO, Python, Ruby, Java, C or whatever. They seem to be
fine with that, no?
Go has the vision "Do what Google needs"
Java has the vision "Do what Oracle wants" (yes, there is the JCP)
C development is really slow and C99 is still barely available and used.
For Python and Ruby I now too little to comment.
Look at the list here:
http://www.reddit.com/r/PHP/comments/1iw0cj/what_would_you_change_about_php_if_you_could/cb9rzw4
I think all of them would be nice to have in PHP for us, the common
PHP programmers, and maybe for the core devs here as well.
[...]
A major issue we have is that our userbase and developer base are quite
distinct groups. And this will always be the case due to language etc.
reasons I mentioned above.
To make this a it more subjective: As I mentioned in the Zend comment in
my previous mail I think going to userland and innovate there is way
more useful than doing everything in core. In Frameworks ever user has
the required knowledge to innovate and contribute.
PHP has to be a base foundation which is reliable and stable so people
can easily update and use it. Things added to PHP should be clearly for
performance or as it really enables something that otherwise can't be
done. For everything else there are frameworks.
And now you know my vision, for which I'd rather kick out things than
add many of the recent RFCs. ;)
johannes
- having a RFC to make a language change requires to have a patch
which if you don't know C and internals you got no chance of doing.Well, so what should happen? An RFC without patch is accepted and then?
Somebody has to write a patch at some time. Whom of the people spending
their free time do you want to force to do that even though they might
not be interested in the feature?
That's a point I keep on hearing on this list (and I actually agree) -
but how do other projects manage that?
Is there a core team that's more inclined to "step up" and just clean a
mess someone else left or handling cruft that somehow pops up?
Unless you have an entity (non-profit or for-profit) that's handling
everyday chores/tasks/steering the vision and demands from its members
to do stuff they don't take up on your own... I don't see how it could
be done in another way :)
Greetings,
Florian
As I answered on Anthony's post, there is not much need for waking up,
or moving the talks to a forum, or discussing the problem to death here.
The problem is clear, and everyone involved on this mailing list is
aware of it to some degree. The only way this can be solved is if the
offenders self-censor and think twice before posting emails. This thread
is yet another example of abuse IMO. Every reply here is wasting a ton
of people's time, and we end up discussing discussion instead of making
progress.
For having been involved in the Rust community recently, I find that
their Code of Conduct [1] is great, and if everyone tries to follow it
discussions remain on point and civilized.
[1] https://github.com/mozilla/rust/wiki/Note-development-policy#conduct
I wish everyone would just take a deep breath after reading something
that makes them angry, and take another long one before hitting send
with a hurtful reply. If someone acts like a dick send them a link to a
code of conduct, either publicly or privately, and ignore everything
else they said. It's been internet wisdom for ages to not feed the trolls.
So if you want to do something useful: draft an RFC with a clear code of
conduct, put it to a vote, promote it. And if you don't agree see above,
take a deep breath and do not waste time answering this email to tell me
an idiot.
Cheers
So if you want to do something useful: draft an RFC with a clear code of
conduct, put it to a vote, promote it. And if you don't agree see above,
take a deep breath and do not waste time answering this email to tell me
an idiot.
Typically RFC's have been about the PHP language and not about the process
of creating the language. I suppose an RFC could function as code of
conduct, though.. I will work on a draft but it will take some time to
create a good code of conduct specific to our needs.
Where's Rasmus, the so called benevolent dictator, to actually dictate
and handle the internals? Yes Rasmus, you're making money out of PHP
yet I haven't seen a comment from you in the past months. Wikipedia
doesn't list you as hibernating.
Rasmus abdicated his potential role as BDFL years ago. PHP doesn't have
a BDFL. That is, arguably, part of the problem.
Then there's that 'little' community of framework developers called
FIG which tried to do some standardization in the way things are done
in userland but guess what. It took 2 years or so for anyone here to
actually think we might really want to add PSR-0 to core. And people
here still have issues with that because it's not in the PHP 'open
spirit' (of the internals). Granted, FIG could do much better but hey,
they follow the example set here by you.
Actually, as far as I'm concerned the Internals free-for-all process is
a great example of everything FIG should avoid, and some of us have been
working very hard to avoid the trap of "be like internals" (as was the
initial model we've been trying to move away from). It's a great object
lesson in how to not run a dev community.
I'd say sorry if that sounds harsh, but I'm not really sorry about it. :-)
Or better yet, ask someone like Facebook to take over and that's it.
Maybe they'll be interested in doing that since they had to rewrite
HHVM two times to get more performance out of PHP.
If you don't like Facebook, let Microsoft take over if they are
interested. They have contributors here, they have some programming
languages under their belt.
We don't need one company taking over PHP. However, nearly all projects
eventually spawn a NFP company to at least help coordinate it, if not
drive it.
Or just dismiss the project completely and let the community take over.
But please, stop with these:
- nah, today is not a good day for this patch/ thread
- we have a leader already
- we have people contributing
- look ma' charts are growing, we are still ahead of others
- I'll just be against everything today as I didn't had enough sugar
in my coffee
attitudes as it's really not productive for developers and companies
that are still using PHP.
As others in this thread have hinted, there are multiple roots to the
problem. A process that sucks (although admittedly not as badly as it
did before RFCs) is one root. A lack of shared vision is another.
When a new feature is proposed, or a controversial fix considered, by
what metric is it judged? What is the goal we're shooting for with
PHP? Is the goal "the easiest to pick up web language", or "the most
powerful web language", or "the fastest performing web language"? Guess
what: Those are, quite often, mutually-exclusive. Which matters more?
Ask 5 people on this list and you'll get 15 answers. That's no way to
run a project, or a community.
Here's another root: PHP may not be a commercial entity, but it still
has users and customers. The first rule of usability is "know thy user;
thou art not thy user", and the first rule of good user-centric or
customer-centric development is "thou art not thy customer".
PHP's customers are people developing IN PHP, not developing PHP. A
serious project needs to focus on what its users want/need/will benefit
from, not what its own developers want. Yes, this is a mental shift for
those working on the project. Yes, this can be hard. No, it's not
always fun.
But the curse of success is that you don't get a choice in whether or
not that shift has to happen. It's a shift that happens TO you, whether
you want it to or not. At that point a lot of developers may drop out
because it's not fun anymore, and feels like work. This happens.
Perhaps it should happen more, as long as there are customer-focused
people to replace them.
(Yes, I have lived through that transition in Drupal. It's still in
progress. Yes we lost people from core in the process. In the end, the
project is stronger for it.)
--Larry Garfield
PHP is a collective mind. Any dictatorship would mean a degradation for it.
If you don't like how it's managed, there is an easy path:
- Earn authority.
- Propose a change.
- Implement it.
- Maintain it.
Start with 1.
Good day internals,
This morning I read something that's not fun:
https://twitter.com/ircmaxell/status/376027280562073600Yet another good contributor leaves this community (not the whole PHP
community) because of the way things are done here.It's true that this is an open source project and everyone can join
and leave whenever he/she wants but like Anthony says, this project
needs more leadership, more vision and definitely a better management.
Someone said that there's no one coming forward or trying to change
things, I may not be the right person to do this but at least maybe
I'll wake up someone who can take action and change things.Here's some facts:
- a couple of months ago named parameters was a taboo subject, I know
because I've asked for it and everyone went silent, now we have a RFC
discussing it- we had a RFC for autoloading functions but people just can't
understand how to provide feedback and at the end of the day it
resulted in a contributor leaving because of the murkiness here- we have a bunch of RFCs waiting for feedback and being trolled to
infinity by people with their own agendas- having a RFC to make a language change requires to have a patch
which if you don't know C and internals you got no chance of doing.
And if you do know C, PHP internals will drain the soul out of you
before doing something- there's no clear objective for what PHP has / will have / will not
have / will not ever have.- there were patches proposed by Facebook, and others, that are / were
rejected, delayed or ignored. Who heard of Facebook anyway, they have
just one website with a billion users probably running on a a couple
of Galaxy Note 3 and 2-3 iPhone 6 as a load balancers, my cat can do
better I tell you.Where's Rasmus, the so called benevolent dictator, to actually dictate
and handle the internals? Yes Rasmus, you're making money out of PHP
yet I haven't seen a comment from you in the past months. Wikipedia
doesn't list you as hibernating.Where Zend | The PHP Company? It's their name, no? They are making
money out of PHP brand, certifications and training? They've added the
opcode cache and that was the single biggest thing they've did in 7
years? Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.Then there's that 'little' community of framework developers called
FIG which tried to do some standardization in the way things are done
in userland but guess what. It took 2 years or so for anyone here to
actually think we might really want to add PSR-0 to core. And people
here still have issues with that because it's not in the PHP 'open
spirit' (of the internals). Granted, FIG could do much better but hey,
they follow the example set here by you.For me this PHP 'open spirit' is just a way of saying: I don't want to
have my head full of real issues so I'll just ignore them and let
others handle them.Look at other languages. Take GO for example, which is done by the
other big noobs on the market called Google.If you want, you can actually start and contribute to the language in
less that a week from learning the language! There's documentation
inside their sources (shocking! I know). There are pages talking about
their language decisions and why they do(n't) support certain things.
PHP has some rather prehistoric documentation about its internals and
that's it. Ok, PHP is written in C not PHP that's why it's harder to
contribute to it but it's not like there's documentation for internals
anyway. Or maybe, just maybe, they actually have some good language
design, who knows?And I know what you'll say:
- yet another one making some smoke, lets ignore him;
- who cares about you complaining, PHP is still the most spread
language for servers- PHP releases very often with new things for developers that they
want / use / need.But you really expect this to continue forever? If so you are plain
ignorant and you shouldn't be part of this.So, either you care about PHP and wake up or leave and let others take
over.Or better yet, ask someone like Facebook to take over and that's it.
Maybe they'll be interested in doing that since they had to rewrite
HHVM two times to get more performance out of PHP.
If you don't like Facebook, let Microsoft take over if they are
interested. They have contributors here, they have some programming
languages under their belt.Or just dismiss the project completely and let the community take over.
But please, stop with these:
- nah, today is not a good day for this patch/ thread
- we have a leader already
- we have people contributing
- look ma' charts are growing, we are still ahead of others
- I'll just be against everything today as I didn't had enough sugar
in my coffee
attitudes as it's really not productive for developers and companies
that are still using PHP.
Florin Patan
https://github.com/dlsniper
http://www.linkedin.com/in/florinpatan
PHP is a collective mind. Any dictatorship would mean a degradation for it.
If you don't like how it's managed, there is an easy path:
- Earn authority.
- Propose a change.
- Implement it.
- Maintain it.
Start with 1.
This is one of only a very, very small few points that, to me,
have any merit. Those who are calling for change have not yet met
point #1 in the above list (and, though it may be confusing to some,
we try to abide by the rules and refer to things as "above" --- a note
to those who have not yet even read the etiquette of the list, yet
still feel entitled to a voice).
One of the reasons PHP has been so successful is that some of us
agreed with the original ideals, the path along which it traveled, and
the camaraderie we found in those who shared our opinions. And to
those of you who may not, let me truncate this with a single order:
Fork.
To the rest of you who are still reading, I'll apologize in
advance for my wordiness.
To those of you who are raising your voices now: why did it take
you so long? Do we - by which I mean folks who actively volunteer
their time to the project - seem unapproachable? Outside of these
QWERTY-coups, the list is generally quiet --- particularly when
changes are proposed. When such discussions come up, there are some
who voice approval or opposition..... and they do, at the very least,
actively participate in the discussion - and democracy - of the
ongoing project as a whole.
Today, I see folks who may have awesome intentions, but - unless I
missed something - are not active contributors.
To which, again, I refer to Seva's very valid Point #1.
[We'll take a quick commercial break to let you know that this
message is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Seva, who - to my
knowlege - I have never even met before. I know return you to the
ongoing rant-thread, already in progress.]
The beauty of the development of PHP - and most other projects
share this exact same quality - is that it's not a singularity. PHP
is an ecosystem. The project has so many roles that, quite honestly,
we can't fill them all. And because it's all based on passionate
folks willing to volunteer their time, it makes it just slightly
difficult to recruit. I don't think help-wanted ads would have very
successful results when considering that we'd be asking folks to
volunteer - as so many have over the years - to fill spots such as:
* Implementation of new features (requires knowledge of C)
* Improvement of the documentation (requires knowledge of English)
* Translation of the documentation (requires knowledge of English
and another language)
* Alpha- and beta-testing new releases and providing feedback (may
require multiple environments)
* Systems administration (requires being required)
* QA (requires patience)
* Bug-reporting (requires sixty seconds or less, or your next bug is free)
Salary: commensurate with experience, divided by zero.
It's not just us, it's all open source projects. Sure, sometimes
having financial backing is great. Unfortunately, that turns folks
away, too --- especially when it eradicates the ecosystem of the
original project. A very basic example to which many of you may
relate: Mandrake. Err.... Mandriva. Well, no matter what its name,
since it's no longer free. I should probably refer to it as
Mandriva(R) at this point, just to be safe.
The short-winded summary (and yes, I saved it for the end, to make
everyone suffer) is this: if you want to make a change in PHP - or
anything in life - then get involved, get active, and get things
accomplished. Don't just pull some "occupy" movement and think things
will change because of a voice in numbers. Get inspired, get
involved, and get the fuck to work. Otherwise, move along, and be
archived like the rest of the one-offs.
hi Florin,
This morning I read something that's not fun:
https://twitter.com/ircmaxell/status/376027280562073600Yet another good contributor leaves this community (not the whole PHP
community) because of the way things are done here.
For what Anthony said he did not leave.
It's true that this is an open source project and everyone can join
and leave whenever he/she wants but like Anthony says, this project
needs more leadership, more vision and definitely a better management.
Someone said that there's no one coming forward or trying to change
things, I may not be the right person to do this but at least maybe
I'll wake up someone who can take action and change things.Here's some facts:
- a couple of months ago named parameters was a taboo subject, I know
because I've asked for it and everyone went silent, now we have a RFC
discussing it- we had a RFC for autoloading functions but people just can't
understand how to provide feedback and at the end of the day it
resulted in a contributor leaving because of the murkiness here
I do not agree here. I read and re read this thread again and all I
can see is one developer trying to get and provide all information to
make an informed decision. The mistake was to discuss in a circular
way for way too long. I, for one. should have interrupted this
discussion, post my thoughts or opinion as well and ask to update the
RFC accordingly.
- we have a bunch of RFCs waiting for feedback and being trolled to
infinity by people with their own agendas
There are controversial RFCs, why we need to discussions, drafts, etc.
before voting. But we suffer from the circular discussions problem way
too often. I can take part of the blame as I did not participate nor
followed enough discussions to avoid this problem.
- having a RFC to make a language change requires to have a patch
which if you don't know C and internals you got no chance of doing.
Well, I cannot help here. Unless I have time and needs for the given
RFC. That's how things work in 99.999% of all OSS projects I
contribute to. It is by no mean a way to block something, but simply a
fact that we have to live with.
And if you do know C, PHP internals will drain the soul out of you
before doing something
We have to improve that, not sure how right now but have some ideas
(RFCs, voting process, release process goals were to solve this exact
problem or part of it).
- there's no clear objective for what PHP has / will have / will not
have / will not ever have.
true, I don't think it will ever have a master plan.
- there were patches proposed by Facebook, and others, that are / were
rejected, delayed or ignored. Who heard of Facebook anyway, they have
just one website with a billion users probably running on a a couple
of Galaxy Note 3 and 2-3 iPhone 6 as a load balancers, my cat can do
better I tell you.
Which patch from Facebook have been ignored or rejected? I can't
remember any of them.
That being said, I really do not think a patch is better or should be
accepted because <big company XYZ> proposes it.
Facebook is huge but their needs barely matches the needs of our
users. Tey do have great ideas, but they have to propose them like any
other contributors.
Then there's that 'little' community of framework developers called
FIG which tried to do some standardization in the way things are done
in userland but guess what. It took 2 years or so for anyone here to
actually think we might really want to add PSR-0 to core. And people
here still have issues with that because it's not in the PHP 'open
spirit' (of the internals). Granted, FIG could do much better but hey,
they follow the example set here by you.
There was a RFC (autoloaded thing if I remember correctly), it got
rejected. We must accepted this decision. Not happy with our choice?
Well, back to the roots, be a contributor and you can vote. I know it
sounds weird to point it this way, but at the end of day this is how
we can change PHP.
For me this PHP 'open spirit' is just a way of saying: I don't want to
have my head full of real issues so I'll just ignore them and let
others handle them.
Not for me. But I do not participate in discussions where I have no
clue or don't see what to discuss but say yes or no. I then simply
wait for the votes.
Look at other languages. Take GO for example, which is done by the
other big noobs on the market called Google.If you want, you can actually start and contribute to the language in
less that a week from learning the language!
I gave many talks about php, how to contribute, etc. My personal
record is 4 new contributions during my talk (less than 45 minutes).
To contribute does not mean you have to know C, there are many other
ways, many of them do not even involve internals discussions.
And I know what you'll say:
- yet another one making some smoke, lets ignore him;
I do not consider what you say as "smoke", but the tone is not the one
I would have used, not while trying to solve a "tone" problem on this
list, in my humble opinion.
- who cares about you complaining, PHP is still the most spread
language for servers
Right, but I do care about complains, as long as they are actually
valid and constructive.
- PHP releases very often with new things for developers that they
want / use / need.
Indeed, and recent huge changes in how we work allow that. is it bad?
But you really expect this to continue forever? If so you are plain
ignorant and you shouldn't be part of this.
No, but what do you actually propose?
So, either you care about PHP and wake up or leave and let others take over.
No thanks, I won't leave. But again, what is your solution?
Or better yet, ask someone like Facebook to take over and that's it.
Maybe they'll be interested in doing that since they had to rewrite
HHVM two times to get more performance out of PHP.
Over my dead body. The day a commercial company actually own PHP, I
will leave, without any delay.
If you don't like Facebook, let Microsoft take over if they are
interested. They have contributors here, they have some programming
languages under their belt.
Be sure I will ask them this week, it happens I'm at their HQ these days ;-)
But please, stop with these:
- nah, today is not a good day for this patch/ thread
- we have a leader already
- we have people contributing
We do. Maybe we need even more to create a balance.
I would also suggest you to look at the NEWS file or release notes for
the 5.4 and 5.5. Almost all major new features have been done by new
contributors! If that's not a sign that things have change, even only
a little bit, then I have no idea what I am doing here.
- look ma' charts are growing, we are still ahead of others
- I'll just be against everything today as I didn't had enough sugar
in my coffee
attitudes as it's really not productive for developers and companies
that are still using PHP.
As I agree on many of the points in this post, I can't and never will
agree on his tone. This is exactly what creates issues with new
contributors, or between core developers.
Cheers,
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org