Re: Remove "Hacker's Guide" from the PHP manual?

On 5 April 2018 at 12:43, Christoph M. Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> wrote: > On 28.03.2018 at 01:11, Christoph M. Becker wrote: > > > In my opinion, we should remove the internals2 book[1] (“PHP at the > > Core: A Hacker's Guide ”) from the PHP manual, since it is still not > > basically up-to-date with PHP 7 (and nobody seems to be working on > > that). Actually, it even states[2]: > > > > | The documentation in this section is current as of PHP 5.3.3, […] > > > > And there is at least one bug report[3] about this. > > > > Instead of investing a lot of time to update the book, I think it is > > more sensible to replace it with a single page which links to external > > documentation, such as > > <http://www.phpinternalsbook.com/>, and to help > > improving and keeping the external docs up to date, if appropriate. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > [1] <http://www.php.net/manual/en/internals2.php> > > [2] > > <http://www.php.net/manual/en/internals2.preface.php> > > [3] <https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=73014> > > Thanks for the positive feedback so far! > > Christopher Jones mentioned > <https://wiki.php.net/internals/references> > in a private communication, which might be the better place to refer to > external documantion. > > Anyhow, I wouldn't remove the "Hacker's Guide" without the blessing of > the manual's editor. Peter, what do you think? > While I would love someone (or a group of people) to volunteer to keep the internals documentation more up-to-date, the fact is that the group of people with the knowledge to keep it updated, and the group of people comfortable writing this type of documentation, are both very small and the overlap between them even smaller still. As much as I'd like to have great internals documentation within the manual, it unfortunately doesn't look like that is going to be forthcoming. I am somewhat hesitant to throw the baby out with the bath water (surely there's *some* useful information in the "Hacker's Guide"). However, a single page with external references would look to be an easier to maintain* alternative, and there are good articles out there to point to on the subject. In summary, I'm good with doing that. * Please don't quote me on this in ten years' time when the page hasn't been changed since 2018. :-) Thanks, Peter "you have my blessing" Cowburn > > -- > Christoph M. Becker >