Well so that one person that is stuck on 1) ... with Manuel and myself stuck at 2)
So let's collect opinions on where people are "stuck" at and then see if what people think Maybe someone will do 2) Maybe we find out that most people are stuck at 1) and we can postpone the whole issue or we find that we need to beg someone to do 2) :-) 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 11:11 PM > To: Php-Dev > Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Built-in SOAP based Web Services support(wasRe:PHP > 5) > > 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] -- 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]
