Other tools we are using, such as Phabricator, will also be following HHVM to Hack (presumably). Facebook, as the largest (by engineering budget) production user of PHP, will certainly have an outsized influence on the direction of the platform and surrounding ecosystem. If we follow path #3 we're probably also committing to supporting Zend development long-term as the primary production user. --scott
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 5:26 PM, Brian Wolff <[email protected]> wrote: > On Monday, September 18, 2017, Max Semenik <[email protected]> wrote: > > Today, the HHVM developers made an announcement[1] that they have plans > of > > ceasing to maintain 100% PHP7 compatibility and concentrating on Hack > > instead. > > > > While this does not mean that we need to take an action immediately, > > eventually we will have to decide something. As I see it, our options > are: > > > > 1) Continue requiring that MediaWiki uses a common set of HHVM and Zend > > PHP. This, however, is a dead end and will make things progressively > harder > > as the implementations will diverge and various Composer libraries we use > > will start requiring some Zend-specific features. > > > > 2) Declare our loyalty to HHVM. This will result in most of our current > > users being unable to upgrade, eventually producing what amounts to a > > WMF-only product and lots of installations with outdated MediaWiki having > > security holes. At least we will be able to convert to Hack eventually. > > This is a very clean-cut case of vendor lock-in though, and if Facebook > > decides to switch their code base to something shinier, we'll be deep in > > trouble. > > > > 3) Revert WMF to Zend and forget about HHVM. This will result in > > performance degradation, however it will not be that dramatic: when we > > upgraded, we switched to HHVM from PHP 5.3 which was really outdated, > while > > 5.6 and 7 provided nice performance improvements. > > > > I personally think that 3) is the only viable option in the long run. > What > > do you think? > > > > ---- > > [1] http://hhvm.com/blog/2017/09/18/the-future-of-hhvm.html > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Max Semenik ([[User:MaxSem]]) > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikitech-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > Well i agree that 3 seems likely the best long term option, we will > probably be doing 1 in the short term. However I think it would be prudent > to wait and see how things turn out in the short term before comitting to > any path. The landscape can still shift quite a lot before the time comes > when its impractical to continue doing 1. > > -- > bawolff > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > -- (http://cscott.net) _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
