Re: windows.php.net

On Sun, 2013-09-01 at 01:50 +0200, Pierre Joye wrote: > > Why and for what? > > > > Few data items: > > * The "news" on w.p.n are not really maintained and provide > > outdated info. > > I take the blame for that. We have been too busy with (many) other > (also non windows specific) QA tasks. The news page issue will be > solved soon, early october max. We hear that for a few years already. Everybody touching pecl is being shot back as there are "major" changes coming. > > * Downloads are not using our 90 world-wide mirrors but a single > > site giving worse connection quality than needed > > Wrong, about the quality. And there are legal reasons why we do not > use the mirrors or other php.net download pages. Well, I got some complains from time to time, obviously hard to tell whether it where the cause was, and even if it works acceptable fast it's still a single point of failure. 1 vs 90 machines. And for legal reasons one can certainly find a solution. Also I don't consider the separation userfriendly. A user comes to php.net and tries to fetch downloads ... that might be streamlined quite a bit when properly grouped together. > > * Snapshots on that site are outdated since more than a year (one > > can find newer ones when looking at a small note) > > Wrong but you are uninformed or did not dig it enough, or do not > follow internals nor bugs.php.net. For your defense, there is a bug in > the snapshot page, blame me too. > For snapshots, see http://windows.php.net/downloads/snaps/ Read the part in parenthesis. One has to be quite observant to see that. I can understand that such a thing doesn't happen immediately after svn2git change, but 1.5 years should be enough to either do it or ask for volunteers. > > * Team lists three people I don't know (might be my fault) who > > probably aren't part of the php.net community (what ever that > > is) and in general I don't understand the need for extra > > credits. > > Yes, your fault. Follow more closely who does the job and you may know > them. Sorry to sound harsh, but I can hardly be diplomatic right now. As said: I can have missed some of them, still i don't see need for extra lists. We have one credits page. > > * The site can only be updated by a small group of people > > different requests to broaden this (i.e. by updating from git > > like other php.net sites) have been rejected (or at least > > ignored, i.e. bug #64277) > > Like to talk about bugs not being taken care of? Please look at the > blocking mysql bugs, which are much more critical than some (c) dates > or similar issues, also much older than a week. Everybody with php karma can fix mysql and other bugs. Work on w.p.n is actively being discouraged. > > * Provide downloads via our mirrors. This might need work on a > > nice downloads page, probably some configuration to make > sure we > > comply to US crypto export stuff (i.e. no U.S. servers for > d/l) > > and probably a different approach to provision the > distributions > > directory (git is not thaaat usable with these tons of > "large" > > binary files) > > Not going to happen either, for various reasons, legal, technical, > security reasons. What ind of technical problems are there? It's software. Most of us are developers. We have a quite huge community we could invite where needed ... If there are security issues on php.net sites they should be fixed. Both for providing source as for providing binaries. > > * handle QA releases similar to snaps, if distributed from > w.p.n > > provide direct links from qa.php.net > > There is a link there. > I was more like thinking about direct download links, so I can tell a user "go to qa.php.net" and him not having to switch sites. johannes