The flip side: I am using a SOAP/XML transport mechanism for one of my projects, via php.
Even though it isn't greatly advanced etc... there is some support. I don't see people jumping ship just cause there isn't a full suite of services for everything. furthermore, i think you could be classed as a bad developer if you used one language for every project. You adapt and use what is appropriate for the project. PHP is a stable ship, with or without Soap/Webservices in the next major release. James Cox > -----Original Message----- > From: Lukas Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 9:53 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Built-in SOAP based Web Services > support(wasRe:PHP 5) > > > Well the problem is that people will want to grow with the specs and use > part of the specs now ... > > And in the end they will use the tool that they grew with and they will > use the tool that is not vapourware when the spec is finalized > > Anyways SOAP is a good thing (tm) > So is UDDI and WDSL (I do not see WDSL anywhere far in the near future > though) > And even if it turns out to suck, too many people have bet on it to be > dropped anytime soon > > So it would really rock to have SOAP > There will be people dropping PHP and there will be people not taking > PHP seriously if it lacks SOAP > > The question is > 1) does anyone care about these people > 2) who will step up and do it > > I do care about 1) but I doubt I will do 2) myself > Sounds like Manuel will not do 2) either and Zeev is in stuck at 1)? or > is does not put 2) high in his priority list? > > So let's keep this discussion focused in the suggestion and not on the > suggestor ... and you all know Manuels style by now ... either ignore > him or focus on his suggestion .. > > and Manuel don't jump on anyone that complains about your style as it > just leads to lengthy threads with few PHP relevant content ... > > and other .. don't jump on when Manuel jumps on someones complains about > his style ... > > oki? > Now hug! > > Just kidding :-) > > Best regards, > Lukas Smith > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _______________________________ > DybNet Internet Solutions GbR > Alt Moabit 89 > 10559 Berlin > Germany > Tel. : +49 30 83 22 50 00 > Fax : +49 30 83 22 50 07 > www.dybnet.de [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _______________________________ > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: James Cox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 10:23 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Built-in SOAP based Web Services > support(wasRe:PHP > > 5) > > > > No, this thread is not going anywhere because web services as defined > by > > the > > non-standards compliant microsoft are still definining what they are > doing > > with web services, (it's only in beta 2) and everyone is insensitive > to > > each > > other. > > > > Manuel, i have been reading this thread and all i can really see here > is > > that you are trying to bully developers to make something that perhaps > > they > > don't feel is appropriate _right now_. I don't think web services > support > > would be appropriate right now for the reasons mentioned above, but > that > > is > > my opinion. I am happy to see that there are some positive things > coming > > out > > to make php5 even better than php4. I don't think discussion about a > set > > of > > services that aren't even grounded yet (they are still experimental!) > is a > > good thing. > > > > Lets discuss things that might benefit the growth of php5, here and > now, > > rather than something that might be suitable for version 5.2. > > > > my 2 cents. > > > > James Cox > > -- > > James Cox :: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Please CC me when replying to my messages > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Manuel Lemos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 9:15 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Built-in SOAP based Web Services > > > support(wasRe:PHP 5) > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > This thread is not going anywhere because you continue to be > insensitive > > > to everything I tell you. > > > > > > > > > Zeev Suraski wrote: > > > > > > > > At 05:28 02/01/2002, Manuel Lemos wrote: > > > > > > (b) If we do it, it'll go on leaking as it does today > > > > > > > > > >False, if you do it you will give one less reason for users to > > > drop PHP. > > > > > > > > That sentence MEANS that though. Maybe you weren't sure of > > > what you were > > > > saying, but saying "We have to do X in order to prevent even more > > users > > > > from leaking" means that even if we do X, users will go on > > > leaking as they > > > > do now, and if we don't do X, they'll leak more. > > > > > > I am sure that I always meant if you provide built-in Web services > > > consuption support the users will not have that excuse to drop PHP. > If > > > they drop PHP it will be for other reasons that you may need to find > out > > > but that is unrelated to this suggestion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Again, I wasn't expecting you to answer me point by point on > > > this and tell > > > > me if you think it's right or not. As I said - "if it's the truth > - > > we > > > > don't want to hear it" - especially when people here don't > > > think it's the > > > > truth. Think positive. > > > > > > Of course, you may not want to believe it now. What I have been > trying > > > to tell you for a long time is that history has shown that all > languages > > > had their best days and worst days. You may disagree just because > you > > > only want to be optimist but if PHP does not adapt to the user > needs, > > > PHP best days are over. > > > > > > It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that the rush for Web > > > services already started and it is going to increase a lot very soon > > > because it provides a new way to for service/content provides to > make > > > money from the Internet. If PHP is not at least as a good solution > as > > > other languages that are already capable of providing built-in > > > consuption, you leave users interested on that no other choice as > > > dropping PHP for those languages. > > > > > > I am not even guessing. It already happened in some other forum > where > > > some user was really trying hard for defending PHP in his company > for > > > providing and consuming Web services. I pointed him to several SOAP > > > based classes that he could use but he told me that it was not > > > convincing in his company because people there are already aware > that > > > even Visual Fox Pro (I thought nobody was using that anymore) can do > it > > > now with built-in commands making it a trivial task compared with > the > > > complexity of using PHP for the same purpose. It doesn't require a > smart > > > person to realize that cases like this will be increasing and people > > > will use something else like when PHP did not have built-in session > > > support. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >You are still not getting it, I don't have a problem when people > do > > not > > > > >accept my ideais. My problem only happens when arises when > > > people invent > > > > >forced excuses for not accepting my ideas or at least to not > > > put them in > > > > >practice. > > > > > > > > What excuses did I make up? What excuses did I even mention? > > > > > > This is your lame excuse for not doing it: > > > > > > > About SOAP and Web services - I agree with you that it would be > > > very good > > > > to have built-in support for it in PHP. However, suggesting > > > this kind of > > > > ideas is usually pretty pointless, unless you're willing to > actually > > do > > > > something about it. I think the only time it worked in the > > > past was when > > > > Sascha picked up the challenge of creating a session module for > PHP, > > > > because PHP really needed one (kodus to Sascha on that) - but > > > that's the > > > > exception to the rule. > > > > > > Meaning, "your idea is good, but my excuse for not doing it is > because > > > of the way you suggested". Very lame excuse! > > > > > > > > > > I said that the preachy way in which you presented your idea is > > > not going > > > > to get you anywhere, let alone PHP. You may have encouraged > someone > > to > > > > > > That is really silly because you think that following my suggestion > you > > > would be doing me a favour! ahahahgah > > > > > > Zeev, get a grip. My developments are no longer PHP specific. I > don't > > > care about built-in Web services support in PHP for myself. I would > not > > > use them in my software. However, it would help me to make a better > case > > > to convince people to stick with PHP. I am sorry that you are so > > > obcessed to do whatever you think I want, that you lost focus and > still > > > don't see that doing that you are only causing harm to your > business. > > > > > > Zeev, take some vacation, you seem to be really needing them! There > > > seems to be already some key developers taking vacation of PHP > > > development after you have been refusing their proposals in Zend 2 > > > list. Maybe you need a rest to stop putting down people that only > come > > > here to bother to help you. > > > > > > > > > > write a CORBA extension, and you definitely pissed off lots of > other > > > > developers. Is that good? Did it get you or PHP anywhere better? > > > > > > Are you pissed Zeev? Really? > > > > > > How do you feel I felt when you (PHP developers) broke backwards > > > compatibility of some PHP functions after many years working the way > > > they did, causing my site to stop working when I upgraded to PHP > 4.1.0? > > > How do you think I felt when you overruled 3 alternative solutions > to > > > repair the damage that you caused by making the mistake of breaking > long > > > standing PHP functions, thus making me spending several days to fix > my > > > site to ban such broken functions from its code? > > > > > > Don't come to me playing to be a victim of me pissing you, when you > have > > > not been such a saint! > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can assure you, by the way, that Andi didn't ask for > out-of-the-blue > > > > ideas from people who don't have any idea on how to do them, and > have > > no > > > > intention of doing anything about them themselves. How about a > > wiseguy > > > > that will suggest to improve the speed of PHP 10 times around? > Great, > > > > we're all for it, but have a plan on how to do it, or be > > > willing to work on > > > > a plan if it's accepted. > > > > > > Read my original message, there is a plan on how to provide the > > > suggested feature. Keeping putting down my suggestion as you do, > only > > > makes your quest to fight me, even sillier. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >It is like Richard Heyes said very well, while Andi asked for > > > > >suggestions you promptly jumped in just to say it is pointless as > if > > it > > > > >was urgent to refuse my suggestion, or at least present an excuse > for > > > > >not implementing it. > > > > > > > > I did not refuse your suggestion or present any excuses. That's > only > > in > > > > > > You are in denial. Read this message above again. > > > > > > > > > > your preset mind. I said it's good, but I also said that you > > > presented it > > > > in a very, VERY poor way, as you tend to often do. There's no > > > conspiracy > > > > > > There's the lame excuse again! > > > > > > > > > > against you, I can assure you that, and if you cause many > > > different people > > > > to object to the way that you present your ideas, you can > > > assume that the > > > > problems lie in your hands, and not everybody else's. > > > > > > Good, revert the problem now to pretend that refusing people's > > > suggestions (not just mine) has you been very into lately is just a > > > problem of somebody else, never you. My mother was right, there is > never > > > one stubborn person alone. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >I hope you see this time is not "just Manuel". Things could have > > worked > > > > >much better if you have to refused the countless times that I > > bothered > > > > >to lend a hand, even if it was just presenting ideas and no code. > Too > > > > >bad that you usually only wanted to get me wrong as if what I was > > > > >suggesting was not going to work in your favour. Anyway, it is > > > not soon, > > > > >but may be is not too late... > > > > > > > > I never refused a single time you bothered to lend a hand - I > > > don't recall > > > > a single time (other than this vague virtual marketing idea > > > which I didn't > > > > > > Good, you just contradicted yourself in the same sentence. > > > > > > Anyway, you memory is really, really short. I don't have time nor > > > patience to repeat myself about all the incidents regarding > suggestions > > > that I made in the last 4 years to improve PHP. > > > > > > On the bright side, it is also funny that some suggestions that I > made > > > ended up being implemented some time later after the discussions > were > > > over. So, I think it is better to end up this discussion now so > somebody > > > implements my suggestion, pretending that it was not suggested by > > > myself. I don't care. When things end up being implemented, it just > > > proves that these heated discussions were not in vain, regardless if > > > anybody ever attributes the progress to my suggestion, that I > honestly > > > do not need any credit for. > > > > > > > > > > consider too good). As far as I recall, you said that Rasmus > > > refused your > > > > help in the past, and I think I was the one that actually > > > pushed for you to > > > > get a CVS account. Not sure though, it was a long time ago. > > > At any rate, > > > > with all the differences I have with Rasmus, and God know we > > > have lots - if > > > > he refused to accept your help, you must have done something > > > TERRIBLY wrong. > > > > > > Of course, I must have done something TERRIBLY wrong at least from > his > > > point of view. My guess is that I challenged his points of view in a > > > public forum with technically correct arguments that he seemed to > not > > > like. I don't know, you have to ask him to let you know for sure. > > > > > > Anyway, the impression that you guys are passing is that you have > this > > > great view of yourselves that you are so good at this, that no > "Manuel" > > > should be allowed to challenge you. After all you are the kings a > PHP, > > > and nobody can challenge the kings, because the king is always > right, > > > and if "Manuel" challenges the king, "Manuel" must be wrong and his > > > arguments must be fought until he shuts up. > > > > > > Maybe you do not intend to look this arrogant, but the fact is that > you > > > look arrogant to many of us, not just the "Manuels". The difference > is > > > that the "Manuels" dare to challenge the kings in public. Some > people > > > appreciate and cheer quietly, others (usually people that just got > CVS > > > accounts recently and want to show appreciation for that grace) join > the > > > kings and rage publically against "Manuel" because he is just one > zealot > > > and it is easier to fight one "Manuel" and fall in the grace of the > > > kings. The funny part is that while this happens, I get some private > > > e-mail of support of people amazed because I dare to challenge the > kinds > > > with pretty important questions. > > > > > > Enough chat, one day you will realize that you are just shooting the > > > messenger just because he did not bring good news. Hopefully it will > not > > > be too late to react to such not so good news. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Manuel Lemos > > > > > > -- > > > PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > To contact the list administrators, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To contact the list administrators, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -- > PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
