> However, and it is what we approved, OSS project leads have a voice,
> today and here. And they are not random people, they know sometimes
> much better than us what should be added to the core (be language, or
> functions in an extension like spl).
Well, I would like to make a point here. Right now, and the
discussion here is that people who contribute to the core and OSS
project leads get a say in the language. What would happen if Google
chose to use PHP instead of Python. Would they get a voice? Should
they get a voice? (even if it's just a single vote)...? What about
professional lead/senior developers who use and develop large and high
traffic sites off the language? What about the sysadmins and/or OS
package maintainers who implement and maintain the language for mass
adoption? What about the individual hosts that contribute so much to
the traction and adoption of PHP as a whole? Do any of them get a
say?
I'm not saying that they should or should not. But I feel it's kind
of back-handed to put OSS project leads up to a voting position and
deny that same position to so many others that have as big (if not a
bigger) impact on the adoption and evolution of the language.
I'm not suggesting how to handle that (or if it even needs to be
handled at all). All I wanted to do is point out the apparent
hypocrisy with it.
Just my $0.02...
Anthony
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:00 AM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com
<guilhermebla...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Jonathan Bond-Caron <jbo...@openmv.com>
> wrote:
>> On Wed Nov 9 10:01 PM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>> Some would simply say "he only did that because he got 3 proposals
>>> rejected". Others would say "he is pressuring A to be in PHP". But not.
>>> I learned the hard way and multiple times to hear a big NO. But at the
>>> same time, I earn my salary from a language that is lead by people
>>> that do only what they want, not what the language really needs. PHP
>>> is a mess, everyone knows it. You have the power to change that, to
>>> make it right.
>>
>> spl_autoload_register('SplAutoLoader');
>>
>> class_exists('Foo'); // Fatal error
>> is_a('Foo', 'Bar', true); // Fatal error
>> is_subclass_of('Foo', 'Bar'); // Fatal error
>>
>> How exactly is PSR-0 making the language better? It's inconsistent with
>> what's in core.
>>
>> That said, I don't think there's anything wrong with bringing the className
>> => fileMapping convention of PSR-0 in core.
>>
>> Small political note: I trust decision making in php to people who
>> understand the internals of the language (on a majority that's the core
>> devs).
>>
>> Other political note: PSR-0 seems to imply that your 'standard project'
>> should have a particular directory structure:
>> https://github.com/lapistano/fig-standards/tree/compatibilityTests/
>>
>> Is this right, wrong, for the better good?
>>
>>
>>
>
> Please keep the focus on the subject.
> It's part of another thread, do not mix the things. =)
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Guilherme Blanco
> Mobile: +55 (11) 8118-4422
> MSN: guilhermebla...@hotmail.com
> São Paulo - SP/Brazil
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
