4 ms·

Apparently Wikipedia, Facebook, Slack are not enough to convince some of PHPs credentials. But add a badly designed package manager that replicates all the prob

by throw2016 8y ago

Apparently Wikipedia, Facebook, Slack are not enough to convince some of PHPs credentials. But add a badly designed package manager that replicates all the problems in Ruby and NPM and suddenly PHP is 'interesting' again. This just reflects the warped incentives of a community more interested in hype, resume padding and currying influence in ecosystem with questionable package managers and frameworks than any technical scrutiny. PHP was always simple to setup and use, the system package manager has all the extensions. App deployment was a breeze anyone could do it. On the other hand with Ruby or Node you need a full build environment, compilation and dependency hell just to deploy apps. Yet according according to some its PHP that is 'in the dark ages'. See the warped incentives and user hostile behavior. It difficult to see how this makes PHP better and hopefully it's attempt to 'gain respect' will not take it down the same path.

tylerjwilk00 8y ago
Although composer was inspired by npm - they are not identical. Composer always just works for me. But with npm I always end up in some strange dependency hell. Add the fact that JS standard library is lacking in some basic functionality and you end up with a ludicrous amount of dependencies. In short, give composer a try if you are already building apps in PHP.
lgl 8y ago
PHP was always simple to setup and use, the system package manager has all the extensions. Sorry if I misunderstood what you're trying to say but this makes no sense to me. It's still the same simplicity to install PHP. But what you do with the package manager is not the same thing as what you achieve with composer. PHP extensions != PHP libraries. You can also use the package manager to install python, ruby, perl, etc. What you generally don't do is use the package manager to install random 3rd party libraries (unless it's a really big project that's been packaged. e.g.: phpmyadmin) Surely you wouldn't want php library maintainers to also create deb's and rpm's of their projects and host their own repositories, deal with distro release politics and other hindrances just so you can use apt or yum to install them?
paulryanrogers 8y ago
While PHP core and officially sanctioned extensions have long been bundled in source and binary distributions there has also been PECL and PEAR.

tylerjwilk00 8y ago

Although composer was inspired by npm - they are not identical. Composer always just works for me. But with npm I always end up in some strange dependency hell. Add the fact that JS standard library is lacking in some basic functionality and you end up with a ludicrous amount of dependencies. In short, give composer a try if you are already building apps in PHP.

lgl 8y ago

PHP was always simple to setup and use, the system package manager has all the extensions. Sorry if I misunderstood what you're trying to say but this makes no sense to me. It's still the same simplicity to install PHP. But what you do with the package manager is not the same thing as what you achieve with composer. PHP extensions != PHP libraries. You can also use the package manager to install python, ruby, perl, etc. What you generally don't do is use the package manager to install random 3rd party libraries (unless it's a really big project that's been packaged. e.g.: phpmyadmin) Surely you wouldn't want php library maintainers to also create deb's and rpm's of their projects and host their own repositories, deal with distro release politics and other hindrances just so you can use apt or yum to install them?

paulryanrogers 8y ago

While PHP core and officially sanctioned extensions have long been bundled in source and binary distributions there has also been PECL and PEAR.