Re: [RFC] Union Types v2 (followup on github usage)
| From: | Rowan Tommins | Date: | Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:02:41 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] Union Types v2 (followup on github usage) | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-106924@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 at 08:37, Côme Chilliet <come@opensides.be> wrote:
> > > PHP have no control over github, and cannot know how it will evolve.
> > >
> > > (they can change the platform tomorrow and internal won’t be able to
> do anything about it).
> >
> > Those are hypothetically problems. But they do not appear to be
> > currently problems.
>
> The fact that PHP has no control over github is current, this is not
> hypothetical.
>
The idea that the platform will change overnight in a way that makes it
unusable by the project is hypothetical.
> It’s not the same when the project can act to fix it and when the project
> is powerless.
> If github blocks someone from commenting we cannot do anything about it.
>
Are you aware of any heavy-handed moderation on github, or is this, again,
a hypothetical problem?
As you will see from my other responses on this thread, I'm not totally
sold on github in particular, but I can see pros and cons more generally:
- our own systems, fully in our control, but used by nobody else, and
managed by a handful of volunteers
- or: a well-established third-party system, which could change in
unpredictable ways, but is widely used, and supported by hundreds of paid
staff
Even the mailing list relies on third-party software; I presume it gets
updated regularly, and those updates could include changes in functionality
we disagree with. There is a pragmatic decision to be made between building
absolutely everything from scratch, and trusting some third parties, with
contingency plans if that trust proves ill-founded.
Regards,
--
Rowan Tommins
[IMSoP]