Re: Re: [RFC] True Async RFC 1.7

On Thu, Jan 22, 2026, at 19:11, Edmond Dantes wrote: > > I think doing such a large project, mainly by > > yourself as the sole designed and developer, is doomed to fail. It isn't > > something I would be confident about voting for, at least. > > One of the reasons this project doesn’t have more programmers is that > nobody believes it will be accepted. > In other words, your fear of voting for the project is the reason > there are no developers. I don’t think that’s universally true, or at least it hasn’t been my experience. I’ve worked on plenty of projects that ultimately failed, and the risk of failure itself isn’t a blocker for me. I’ve read through the code, I understand the design, and I’ve worked on schedulers and low-level systems before. From a purely technical standpoint, this is work I’d normally be very interested in contributing to. When I personally stepped back, it wasn’t due to doubts about acceptance, but due to the way feedback and collaboration have played out so far. In both on-list and off-list discussions, I didn’t see concrete feedback being meaningfully incorporated, even at a small or incremental level. That made it hard for me to gauge whether collaboration would actually influence the direction of the project. I want to be clear about something important, though: this isn’t a lack of interest in asynchronous capabilities in PHP, nor a lack of willingness to help. I think many people would like to see PHP move forward here. But for a project of this size and impact, contributors need to feel that concerns are being heard, trade-offs are being explored together, and iteration is genuinely collaborative. If the process moves in that direction, breaking things down, explicitly engaging with criticism, and evolving the design based on shared input, I think you may find that more people are willing to invest time and energy into it. — Rob