Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

David, On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 5:05 PM, David Zuelke wrote: > On 11.01.2016, at 12:31, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > >> Actually, asking for proof and denying are the same thing. If they >> weren't, then why would you be asking for proof unless you believed it

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Anonymous voting on wiki

Hi Eli, Le 11/01/2016 15:45, Eli a écrit : On 1/10/16 8:15 AM, Dennis Birkholz wrote: I would really like to understand the rational behind anonymous voting in the PHP internals context. Votes for RFCs should be purely based on technical reasons and whether the language change would benefit

[PHP-DEV] Status Of CoC RFC: (WAS: Adopt Code of Conduct)

All, > If we want to deal with the reasons why people avoid internals, the let's go > and analyze the problem first ? I will start asking whether we really want > to attract newcomers. The question may sound ridiculous but I think we > don't, mostly because most people here see newcomers as just

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Anonymous voting on wiki

Hi all, On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 7:29 PM, Andreas Heigl wrote: >> From my own point of view, I like to know who supports and who opposes a >> particular RFC simply because I can't vote myself. It helps me to decide >> if I need to look deeper into the RFC or if I can rely on

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 7.1 - Argon2

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Solar Designer wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:04:36AM -0500, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > > To my understanding, the crypt scheme hasn't been formalized. Solar > > Designer, can you confirm? > > I think it has been, in the way defined by

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Le 11/01/2016 23:55, Anthony Ferrara a écrit : There are two prime reasons people may avoid internals (at least related to this discussion). 1. Don't want to deal with the aggressive tone of the list 2. Don't want to expose themselves to targeted aggression/negativity If we want to deal with

RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> > That's because nobody does that. Instead, the question is whether the > > specific proposal is helpful to fix specific issues. The conversation > > goes like this: > > > > A: here's solution X! > > B: for what? > > A: for problem Y > > B: but do we have problem Y? Also, X does not seem to

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 11.01.2016, at 12:31, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > Actually, asking for proof and denying are the same thing. If they > weren't, then why would you be asking for proof unless you believed it > didn't happen? They are not the same thing. If you make a claim, then the onus of

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 11/01/16 22:55, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > There are two prime reasons people may avoid internals (at least > related to this discussion). > > 1. Don't want to deal with the aggressive tone of the list > 2. Don't want to expose themselves to targeted aggression/negativity Sorry, but this is

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > I don't think that's a fair characterization of this discussion. Some > people have questioned what this is a solution to, but most haven't. > Some have questioned if we have a problem, but most haven't. Again, "a problem". You and Pierre are talking as if there's specific problem you have

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 7.1 - Argon2

On Jan 12, 2016 6:28 AM, "Scott Arciszewski" wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Solar Designer wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:04:36AM -0500, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > > > To my understanding, the crypt scheme hasn't been formalized.

Re: [PHP-DEV] mcrypt extermination plan

2016. jan. 10. 12:57 ezt írta ("Marco Pivetta" ): > > While I'd love to see mcrypt die, unless we all forgot how semver works, > this isn't how it can be done :-\ > If you want to actually drop something, regardless of how bad it is (and I > know mcrypt is bad), then the next

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 7.1 - Argon2

> On 11 Jan 2016, at 07:57, Scott Arciszewski wrote: > > Does adding Argon2 as a possible choice for password_hash() + > password_verify() need an RFC? Or can I just submit a pull request? The original RFC (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/password_hash) contained the following

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > > Even without that, though, it's clear we *do* have more serious issues > > than just "rudeness". When a major contributor is getting death-threats > > over an RFC, *there is a problem*. That they're

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > Even without that, though, it's clear we *do* have more serious issues > than just "rudeness". When a major contributor is getting death-threats > over an RFC, *there is a problem*. That they're happening off-list > doesn't change the fact that *that is a problem*. OK, so to evaluate

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

First and foremost, as PHP is an open source project and the lifeblood of any open source project is accepting that people do come (and go). I've been watching internals for a few years and that is clearly obvious. So it seems silly for any open source project to argue against newcomers. On

[PHP-DEV] Internals and Newcomers and the Sidelines (WAS: Adopt Code of Conduct)

[Apologies for the re-post; I’m re-sending this with a new subject because it’s really not about the CoC RFC.] > On Jan 11, 2016, at 19:40, François Laupretre wrote: > > If we want to deal with the reasons why people avoid internals, the let's go > and analyze the problem

Re: [PHP-DEV] Throwable and Error exceptions break existing PHP 5.x code

Hi Adam, Adam Harvey wrote: On 11 January 2016 at 06:05, Rowan Collins wrote: Since set_exception_handler() is intended as a last-ditch "something's gone very wrong" function anyway, I think it receiving all Throwables makes sense, even if the BC break in your

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 11, 2016, at 19:40, François Laupretre wrote: > > If we want to deal with the reasons why people avoid internals, the let's go > and analyze the problem first ? I will start asking whether we really want to > attract newcomers. The question may sound ridiculous but

[PHP-DEV] Re: Internals and Newcomers and the Sidelines (WAS: Adopt Code of Conduct)

Hi! > This is yet another example of the toxic internals problem. > Regardless of one's views on the CoC proposal, the conduct of > php-internals as a whole has been reprehensible. What in your opinion was reprehensive, could you explain? > And *every* time I start to think, "ok, I'm finally

[PHP-DEV] Throwable::getCode() inconsistencies

Current situation from the manual: - Interface method Throwable::getCode() promises to return int. - The Error class and the Exception class both implement Throwable, but their constructor accepts $code as int while their getCode() method returns mixed. The reason, reveals the

Re: [PHP-DEV] Throwable and Error exceptions break existing PHP 5.x code

On 11 January 2016 at 06:05, Rowan Collins wrote: > Since set_exception_handler() is intended as a last-ditch "something's gone > very wrong" function anyway, I think it receiving all Throwables makes > sense, even if the BC break in your scenario is unfortunate. Agreed

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Stas, On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > >> I fail to understand how one can think that the CoC could be about >> censorship (which is basically what this comment says). > > I can explain you that very easily: there are known instances where

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 11, 2016, at 2:48 AM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > > So, we have a situation where we have a mismatch between a problem and a > solution, and that is what the misunderstanding is based on. You and > several other people try to prove something we already agree about

RE: [PHP-DEV] Re: Anonymous voting on wiki

> -Original Message- > From: Stanislav Malyshev [mailto:smalys...@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2016 12:00 AM > To: Andrea Faulds ; internals@lists.php.net > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Anonymous voting on wiki > > Hi! > > > This seems useful. I do wonder whether

[PHP-DEV] Throwable and Error exceptions break existing PHP 5.x code

Greetings, Short premise before I get flamed: I know PHP 7 is rolling and it is way too late for this, that I should've tested the RCs, follow the mailing list and so on, but I'm a dev like you guys and struggle with the time to do everything by the book, including reading the previous threads

Re: [PHP-DEV] Throwable and Error exceptions break existing PHP 5.x code

Giovanni Giacobbi wrote on 11/01/2016 13:31: set_exception_handler(callback function, bool also_throwables = false); The new parameter "also_throwables" defaults to false, so the same behaviour as before is preserved. If you want it to catch also the new PHP7 Error exceptions, you can just set

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 7.1 - Argon2

Hi, On Jan 11, 2016 4:12 PM, "Rouven Weßling" wrote: > > > > On 11 Jan 2016, at 07:57, Scott Arciszewski wrote: > > > > Does adding Argon2 as a possible choice for password_hash() + > > password_verify() need an RFC? Or can I just submit a pull

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

I question if there is a way to keep all communication in PHP Internals on PHP Internals, which would minimize the risk of someone reaching someone outside of PHP Internals. By that I mean, as it stands now, everyone's email is public and someone meaning to cause or threaten harm could personally

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Anonymous voting on wiki

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 2:44 PM, Derick Rethans wrote: > On Sat, 9 Jan 2016, Andrea Faulds wrote: > > > Hi Stas, > > > > Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > > > > > Since in CoC discussion it was mentioned we may need anonymous > > > voting, I've created a patch that allows anonymous

RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Larry, Thanks for your detailed letter. I think that I'm not that far off from your position, but clearly, there are some differences of opinion that lead us to different conclusions. Given the length of your email, I'm going to be very^H^H^H^H selective in what I respond to. > I'm inclined

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 7.1 - Argon2

On 11 January 2016 at 09:12, Rouven Weßling wrote: > > > On 11 Jan 2016, at 07:57, Scott Arciszewski wrote: > > > > Does adding Argon2 as a possible choice for password_hash() + > > password_verify() need an RFC? Or can I just submit a pull request?

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Anonymous voting on wiki

On 1/9/16 5:03 PM, Andrea Faulds wrote: > Hi Stas, > > Stanislav Malyshev wrote: >> Hi! >> >>> This seems useful. I do wonder whether we should use by default for >>> RFCs. It's interesting to see how different people vote, and knowing >>> who >> >> I think we talked about it, and decided not to

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Anonymous voting on wiki

On Sat, 9 Jan 2016, Andrea Faulds wrote: > Hi Stas, > > Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > > > Since in CoC discussion it was mentioned we may need anonymous > > voting, I've created a patch that allows anonymous polls to be > > created: > > > > https://github.com/php/web-wiki/pull/7 > > > > The

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Anonymous voting on wiki

On 11 January 2016 at 12:14, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Stanislav Malyshev [mailto:smalys...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2016 12:00 AM > > To: Andrea Faulds ; internals@lists.php.net > > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re:

Re: [PHP-DEV] Throwable and Error exceptions break existing PHP 5.x code

Dear Giovanni, I brought this up last July, see https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=70050 ; because in a few code bases I tested back then, this was the first issue I hit. Unfortunately, it was only deemed a "Documentation Problem" back then. AFAIK this is the most up to date information. Sorry I

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 7.1 - Argon2

> On 11 Jan 2016, at 13:27, Pierre Joye wrote: > > Hi, > On Jan 11, 2016 4:12 PM, "Rouven Weßling" wrote: > > > > * Is there already a crypt scheme for Argon2? Or are there any efforts to > > define one? It would good if PHP wouldn’t be an island.

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> > At the same time, though, if someone is being maliciously hostile what > great cover! A private email is not a PHP-Group managed resource, so no > rules! Twitter, ha, no rules! Reddit? LOL like they enforce anything. > If someone wanted to send a death threat to another developer about PHP

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Anonymous voting on wiki

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Eli wrote: > On 1/9/16 5:03 PM, Andrea Faulds wrote: > > Hi Stas, > > > > Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > >> Hi! > >> > >>> This seems useful. I do wonder whether we should use by default for > >>> RFCs. It's interesting to see how different people

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > > This particular case isn't what a CoC would protect. So I think that's > > a bit of a red herring. The CoC doesn't try to enforce itself outside > > of the scope of project members. Instead, it applies to

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 6:05 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote: > > > On Jan 11, 2016, at 11:00, Brandon Savage > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Anthony Ferrara > > wrote: > > > >> The CoC doesn't try to enforce

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > This particular case isn't what a CoC would protect. So I think that's > a bit of a red herring. The CoC doesn't try to enforce itself outside > of the scope of project members. Instead, it applies to project OK, that is clear enough, but I see an issue here - we'd be applying an pressure

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > > least hold ourselves to a level of mutual respect. Going out and > > calling someone a moron in public is not constructive nor respectful, > > and IMHO we as a project shouldn't sit back and blindly say

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Stas, On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > >> least hold ourselves to a level of mutual respect. Going out and >> calling someone a moron in public is not constructive nor respectful, >> and IMHO we as a project shouldn't sit back and blindly

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 11, 2016, at 11:00, Brandon Savage wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Anthony Ferrara > wrote: > >> The CoC doesn't try to enforce itself outside >> of the scope of project members. Instead, it applies to project >> members

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Anonymous voting on wiki

Hi! > the anonymous voting was reverted almost instantly, or about the recent CoC > discussion which was back and forth between having the voters/reporters > privacy, shielding them from potential backlash or having more transparency > for the voting results, so I'm curious about what Stas meant

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 7.1 - Argon2

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:04:36AM -0500, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > To my understanding, the crypt scheme hasn't been formalized. Solar > Designer, can you confirm? I think it has been, in the way defined by encoding.c in: https://github.com/P-H-C/phc-winner-argon2 $ echo password | ./argon2

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > The CoC doesn't try to enforce itself outside > of the scope of project members. Instead, it applies to project > members wherever they represent the project. > So just to be clear, your intent is for the CoC to

Re: [PHP-DEV] Fwd: [PHP Wiki] Your DokuWiki password

On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 3:30 AM, Bryan Hoffpauir wrote: > Good Day! I'm a new member of the PHP Community Wiki and I'd like to have > my account updated so that I might edit my profile and update my password. > > My username is specified below (and my sig has links to my blog

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Anonymous voting on wiki

Thanks for all the backstory Ferenc, but I knew about the reasons for this pull request. It's relation to the current CoC discussion, as well as the past cases of having anonymous votes and it's rollback. But my statement was in the context of the thread between Stas & Andrea. Wherein Stas

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Brandon, On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Brandon Savage wrote: >> >> At the same time, though, if someone is being maliciously hostile what >> great cover! A private email is not a PHP-Group managed resource, so no >> rules! Twitter, ha, no rules! Reddit? LOL like

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Anonymous voting on wiki

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Eli wrote: > Thanks for all the backstory Ferenc, but I knew about the reasons for this > pull request. It's relation to the current CoC discussion, as well as the > past cases of having anonymous votes and it's rollback. > > But my statement was

[PHP-DEV] UGLY Benchmark Results for PHP Master 2016-01-11

Results for project PHP master, build date 2016-01-11 06:30:31+02:00 commit: e6ed53e previous commit:bb357e0 revision date: 2016-01-08 17:21:59+00:00 environment:Haswell-EP cpu:Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v3 @ 2.30GHz 2x18 cores, stepping 2, LLC 45 MB

Re: [PHP-DEV] Fwd: [PHP Wiki] Your DokuWiki password

Ferenc, Thank you for the breakdown, I appreciate the explanation of the process! I'll get to work :) Sincerely, Bryan "BJ" Hoffpauir, Jr. beejh...@gmail.com Blog: http://innovez.blogspot.com LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/bjhofpauir On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 8:42 AM, Ferenc Kovacs

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Anonymous voting on wiki

On 1/10/16 8:15 AM, Dennis Birkholz wrote: > I would really like to understand the rational behind anonymous voting > in the PHP internals context. Votes for RFCs should be purely based on > technical reasons and whether the language change would benefit the > language in the long run or not. I

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 11, 2016, at 9:11 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > > Brandon, > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Brandon Savage > > wrote: > >> And that to me is the crux of the issue. When it comes to making >>

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > least hold ourselves to a level of mutual respect. Going out and > calling someone a moron in public is not constructive nor respectful, > and IMHO we as a project shouldn't sit back and blindly say "whatever" > if it happens. OK, so what should we do instead? So far my calls to apply some

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 7.1 - Argon2

+ Solar Designer On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Rouven Weßling wrote: > >> On 11 Jan 2016, at 13:27, Pierre Joye wrote: >> >> Hi, >> On Jan 11, 2016 4:12 PM, "Rouven Weßling" wrote: >> > >> > * Is there already a crypt

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Jan 11, 2016 8:47 PM, "Brandon Savage" wrote: > > > > > At the same time, though, if someone is being maliciously hostile what > > great cover! A private email is not a PHP-Group managed resource, so no > > rules! Twitter, ha, no rules! Reddit? LOL like they

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 12:52 PM Pierre Joye wrote: > On Jan 11, 2016 8:47 PM, "Brandon Savage" > wrote: > > > > > > > > At the same time, though, if someone is being maliciously hostile what > > > great cover! A private email is not a PHP-Group

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > I fail to understand how one can think that the CoC could be about > censorship (which is basically what this comment says). I can explain you that very easily: there are known instances where CoCs were used and even more instances where there were attempts to use CoCs and CoC-like