Hey Jim,
On 26.8.2024 19:44:18, Jim Winstead wrote:
Hi,
Another RFC around process:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/web-and-doc-use-not-endorsement
Feedback would be appreciated. My intention is to start voting on
September 9th unless there is still ongoing discussion.
Thanks.
Jim
Thanks for bringing this up - I also suggest that we make this a binary
choice - either we adopt the proposed language or its opposite.
I.e. a rejection of this should codify that statement in the negative.
I do in particular reject the notion that we should document third-party
projects (usage for our infra is fine).
The point of the PHP documentation is to describe the PHP runtime and
PECL extensions, which are both officially distributed through php.net.
Anything not related to these does not belong into the manual, much less
into core documentation (like language/oop5 autoload.xml, to take the
example from https://github.com/php/doc-en/pull/3677/files).
Changing this current unwritten rule is an invitation to implicitly
promote specific projects. The question is really where does it end?
Would we for example also mention PSRs as "widely followed guidelines
for interoperability" or something? It's a strong invitation for some
scope creep.
As such I strongly condemn the idea of inclusion of this guideline.
There are, ultimately, enough ways for people to learn about the PHP
ecosystem, the php.net documentation is none of them. If I go to
php.net, it's because I want to learn about the runtime, not its ecosystem.
Bob
