Re: about the latest frontpage entry

From: Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 09:34:07 +0000
Subject: Re: about the latest frontpage entry
References: 1 2 3 4  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to internals+get-74545@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:12 AM, Michael Wallner <mike@php.net> wrote:

> On 28 May 2014 10:29, Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:24 AM, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> > Would like to know what do you guys think about the best step, I see
> the
> >> > following possible options:
> >>
> >> I wonder why I didn't see any discussion about it here. Did I miss it?
> >> If not, it would be a good idea next time to announce such things
> >> upfront and solicit feedback. Of course, usually php.net news do not
> >> require that, but usually they also are much more routine than
> >> announcing a big rewrite of the engine in progress.
> >>
> >
> > there were no previous discussion on the list about it, it was a short
> > discussion on irc (#php.pecl), but originally it was meant to be a
> personal
> > blogpost, so there is a chance that not every participant understood that
> > it would end up on the frontpage.
> > I agree that statements like this should be written more carefully and
> > making sure that it comforms with the opinion of the majority of the
> people
> > behind the project.
>
> It should be removed if nobody is able to reword it in an objective
> and professional style.
> I'd really refrain from using words or phrases like "kittens",
> "necessitated the birth", "collaboration it is inspiring" and
> "grounded, honest and open" -- but maybe it's just the aggregation of
> all of it.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Mike
>

If it is to be rewritten, I think it would be best to brainstorm and agree
here what specific points it should cover and what stuff from the original
should specifically be left-out.  Then a professionally worded post could
be drafted that covers those points.  I'd be happy to volunteer to take
that part on.

I do agree with everything Pierre said about it.  However, given that it's
already been widely disseminated, I don't think simply removing it is any
longer an option.  That bridge has already been burned behind us, in my
opinion.  Instead, I propose that we remove it and replace it with one that
covers the following points (this is just a start; please feel free to
add/remove points):


   - Brief summary of phpng and its goals.
   - Current status of the project (perhaps with emphasis on the fact that
   it is very early stage and doesn't reflect any current change to PHP?).
   - Credit to the initial authors.
   - Explanation of why the original post was removed.

Other possible points to include would be an explanation of the JIT stuff
and a link to an archvie of the original post for transparency, though I'd
be interested to know what everyone else thinks about including those.

As for stuff not to include, I think Mike already summed it up pretty well.
 Editorial language (i.e. opinion), melodramatic hyperbole, and sardonic
quips about kittens should definitely be left out of any official
announcement.

Thoughts?

--Kris


Thread (70 messages)

« previous php.internals (#74545) next »