Missatge de Deleu <[email protected]> del dia dt., 27 d’ag. 2024 a les 13:55:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 2:06 AM Andreas Heigl <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> I see this a bid differently to be honest. While I understand that using
>> third party packages in our internal tools might make things easier in
>> the short term it will cause a lot or additional work in the long term.
>>
>> Currently we have a lot of small scripts that do one thing. And they do
>> it for a long time with very little maintenance effort. Blowing these
>> scripts up with third-party libraries will mean that we will have to put
>> in much more maintenance effort for either keeping the dependencies up
>> to date or mostly rewriting the script the moment a change needs to
>> happen as the libraries will be outdated.
>>
>> There are though some actual console applications like Pdt where it
>> might be valid to use third party dependencies. But also here I'd ask
>> whether the maintainability will be increased. A totally different
>> question though is whether we actually need to maintain a special tool
>> for building the docs or whether we can use a pre-existing tool for
>> that. I am mainly thinking about either phpDocumentor or a default
>> docbook renderer. But that is a totally differnt topic IMO.
>>
>> So I'd see this exactly the other way around:
>>
>> usage for infra needs very careful consideration to not increase the
>> maintenance-burden on those that actually 'do' the maintenance.
>
>
> I like the fact this has been brought up as it seems an equally important consideration from my
> perspective. On one hand I remember reading about how PHP Internals could hugely benefit from more
> volunteers to help maintain the auxiliary projects of the language - which doesn't require C
> knowledge. Perhaps this 'need' might be outdated now with the Foundation hiring employees
> to work on PHP. On the other hand there's this really good point about not creating a burden
> for existing maintainers of existing tools. Ultimately, I find it important to consider that a tool
> that has been "mostly no maintenance cost" for 10~20 years, then it might be following PHP
> development practices so long gone that it's harder to capture new volunteers. I understand
> there's a historical context in the 2000's where PHP frameworks would come and go and most
> companies had their own in-house framework. That reality is long-gone and community projects like
> Symfony, Laravel and Composer are sustainable businesses that simultaneously rely on PHP and make
> PHP better. Nowadays it is unlikely that a PHP developer will pick up greenfield work with the
> language without using some reliable tool provided by the community.
>
> As it has been said, it is a disservice to the PHP project to be stuck on vanilla PHP for
> things that require improvements, maintainers, revamp, etc..
>
It would be helpful if you could share examples of open-source,
long-term websites built using frameworks like Laravel, Symfony,
Laminas, CakePHP, or similar, especially those to which you have
contributed, ideally maintained by volunteers.
--
Pere Orga