PHP is one of the most widely used programming languages in the world. Despite this remarkable success, PHP has long been perceived by parts of the broader tech community as declining or “dead” – a narrative that is demonstrably false but nonetheless persists.
One significant factor contributing to this perception gap is PHP's lack of coordinated marketing and communications efforts. While individual community members, conferences, and the PHP Foundation actively promote PHP through various channels, the official PHP project itself has no formal policy governing its presence on social media or other communication platforms.
This RFC proposes establishing a formal policy for PHP's official social media presence and marketing communications, ensuring that the PHP project can effectively communicate with its community and the broader technology ecosystem.
PHP currently maintains several official social media accounts, most notably:
The disparity is stark. The Twitter account, with over 100,000 followers – a substantial audience for any programming language – has been silent for nearly two years. Meanwhile, the Mastodon account operates with automated posting, demonstrating that minimal-effort communication is both technically feasible and operationally sustainable.
Apart from followers, we can use PHP’s analytics data as a proxy metric to estimate engagement acquired from different social media.
For April 2026, the data looks as follows:
| Social Network | Visits | Share |
|---|---|---|
| YouTube | 5,373 | 33.66% |
| 2,915 | 18.26% | |
| X/Twitter | 2,102 | 13.17% |
| StackOverflow | 2,068 | 12.96% |
| 2,048 | 12.83% | |
| 675 | 4.23% | |
| Telegram | 205 | 1.28% |
| Hacker News | 166 | 1.04% |
| Vkontakte | 154 | 0.96% |
| Sourceforge | 98 | 0.61% |
| 58 | 0.36% | |
| Mastodon | 37 | 0.23% |
| Workplace | 16 | 0.10% |
| V2EX | 15 | 0.09% |
| Bluesky | 14 | 0.09% |
| Threads | 12 | 0.08% |
Among platforms in scope of this policy, X/Twitter accounts for 13.17% of social referral traffic, more than LinkedIn (4.23%) and Mastodon (0.23%) combined. This traffic is generated despite the X account being dormant since June 2024. An active automated account would expand reach.
Currently, credentials for official PHP social media accounts are held by individual community members without clear governance policies. While these individuals have historically acted in good faith, the absence of formal policy creates several issues:
This RFC proposes adopting a formal Social Media and Marketing Communications Policy for the PHP project. The specific policy text will be submitted to https://github.com/php/policies after RFC approval.
The policy is built on the following principles:
This policy establishes clear roles and responsibilities for PHP's official communications:
The PHP Infrastructure Team is responsible for:
This is a purely technical and operational role. The Infrastructure Team executes communications but does not determine content strategy.
The PHP Foundation is designated as the decision-maker for PHP's official communications:
This separation ensures that those with marketing expertise and organizational capacity (the Foundation) drive content decisions, while technical implementation remains with the Infrastructure Team.
An alternative considered was a joint committee composed of Foundation representatives and volunteer Internals contributors. This was rejected in favor of the current proposal for the following reasons:
If the community prefers the joint-committee model, this RFC can be amended during discussion to incorporate it.
The following platforms have significant developer audiences and can be served with automated or low-effort text-based communications:
| Platform | Audience Size | Status | Proposed Action |
|---|---|---|---|
| Twitter/X | ~109K followers | Dormant since Jun 2024 | Reactivate with automation |
| Mastodon | ~5K followers | Active (automated) | Continue current approach |
| ~225K followers | Active (not automated) | Automate, continue current approach |
Platforms such as YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram require significant resources for video content creation that the PHP project does not currently have. These platforms are explicitly out of scope for this RFC but may be addressed in future proposals if resources become available.
The following content types are suitable for fully automated cross-platform posting, requiring no per-post approval:
These are triggered automatically by project events (release announcements, security commits, vote closures).
The following content types require Foundation approval before posting:
Any proactive marketing efforts beyond the above categories are delegated to the PHP Foundation:
The Foundation may pursue such initiatives at its discretion, coordinating with the Infrastructure Team for technical execution.
The Mastodon account already mostly operates under the model proposed by this RFC: automated posting via GitHub Actions for releases, no per-post overhead. It demonstrates that the proposed model is technically feasible and operationally sustainable.
Following the Mastodon model, automated posting will be implemented via GitHub Actions and Pull Requests where possible.
Upon adoption of this RFC:
If this RFC fails, the project will continue without formal governance over communications. In that case, individual platform decisions (including the pending X/Twitter link removal) should each go through their own RFC, with the understanding that each such decision creates ad-hoc precedent rather than systematic policy.
A separate RFC and PR propose removing the X/Twitter link from PHP.net on the basis that the account is dormant. This RFC takes the position that the link should not be removed at this time, on procedural rather than substantive grounds:
This RFC therefore proposes that link-removal questions be deferred until the governance framework is adopted.
The relevant question is not whether PHP endorses platform ownership — maintaining a presence on X/Twitter does not endorse X/Twitter's ownership any more than maintaining a GitHub presence endorses Microsoft's.
By maintaining presence across multiple platforms (X/Twitter, Mastodon, LinkedIn), PHP avoids dependence on any single platform and reaches developers wherever they prefer to be.
Major open-source projects and organisations (TypeScript, Golang, OpenJS Foundation, Python Software Foundation, Apache Foundation, Linux Foundation) maintain X/Twitter accounts.
That said, this RFC does not require PHP to maintain an X presence. It establishes a process. If the PHP Foundation, operating under the content authority defined here, determines that X is no longer an appropriate channel for PHP communications, the Foundation can pause or end posting. The decision becomes accountable, documented, and reversible — rather than the result of one person's inaction.
This RFC establishes a new policy and does not affect any existing PHP functionality or code.
Current holders of official PHP social media credentials will be asked to:
No individual's contributions or historical stewardship are diminished by this policy. This RFC seeks to formalize and extend existing practices, not to criticize past volunteers.
The Foundation has the organizational structure, staff, and expertise to make consistent, strategic communications decisions. The Foundation's mission—supporting PHP—aligns perfectly with effective PHP marketing.
The Foundation's content authority includes the discretion to pause or end official posting on any platform when it determines doing so serves PHP's communications goals or community interests. Such a decision would be documented and reversible. The point of this framework is that platform decisions become deliberate, accountable, and revisitable — not the result of inaction or unilateral choices by individual credential holders.
No. The Infrastructure Team holds credentials and operates the accounts. The Foundation decides what content gets posted. This is similar to how a marketing department works with an IT department: marketing decides the message, IT manages the systems.
The policy establishes the Foundation as the content authority. The Infrastructure Team's role is technical execution, not content approval. If significant concerns arise about specific content, they should be raised with the Foundation board directly.
Yes. This policy can be amended by a future RFC with 2/3 majority approval. The community retains ultimate authority over PHP project policies.
Automated posts will be adapted to platform conventions (e.g., character limits, hashtag practices) but will contain equivalent information across all platforms. Platform-specific strategies beyond basic adaptation are at the Foundation's discretion.
Absolutely. This policy governs only official PHP project accounts. Community members, Foundation staff, and core developers are encouraged to continue personal advocacy for PHP.
The Foundation markets itself and promotes PHP through its own channels. This RFC specifically addresses the official PHP project accounts (like @official_php), which are distinct from the Foundation's accounts. This policy creates a formal relationship where the Foundation also guides the project's official communications.
The Foundation employs developers and engages staff and volunteers with experience in developer relations and communications. Most content under this policy is automated (releases, security, votes), with curated content and marketing initiatives within the Foundation's existing operational scope. The policy does not require the Foundation to expand staffing; it formalizes responsibilities the Foundation is already structurally suited to carry out.
A single yes-or-no vote on the policy as a whole, requiring 2/3 majority.
To be added to https://github.com/php/policies
# Social Media and Marketing Communications Policy ## Purpose This policy governs the PHP project's official presence on social media and other communication platforms, establishing clear roles for account custody and content authority. ## Scope This policy applies to all accounts officially representing the PHP project, including but not limited to: - Twitter/X (@official_php) - Mastodon (@php@fosstodon.org) - LinkedIn (@phpnet) ## Principles 1. **Reach**: PHP shall consider maintaining presence on all platforms with significant developer audiences. 2. **Automation**: Communications shall be automated where feasible. 3. **Neutrality**: Communications shall focus on PHP, not platform politics. 4. **Shared Stewardship**: Multiple credential holders shall manage each account. 5. **Transparency**: This policy shall be public and versioned. ## Roles and Responsibilities ### Infrastructure Team: Account Custody The Infrastructure Team is responsible for: - Credential custody (minimum 3 holders per account) - Secure credential storage and succession - Automation implementation and maintenance - Technical posting operations ### PHP Foundation: Content Authority The PHP Foundation is responsible for: - Content decisions (what, when, messaging, tone) - Strategic communications direction - Marketing initiatives beyond automated content - Consultation on communications matters ## Content Guidelines ### Automated Content (No Approval Required) - Release announcements - Security advisories - RFC voting results ### Curated Content (Foundation Approval Required) - Conference/event announcements - Documentation milestones - Celebrations and anniversaries - Blog post promotions ### Marketing Initiatives (Foundation Led) - Coordinated campaigns - Narrative responses - Developer outreach - Ecosystem cross-promotion ### Prohibited Content - Political statements unrelated to PHP - Commercial endorsements of products or services unrelated to PHP - Personal opinions presented as PHP's official position - Code of Conduct violations - Personal grievances or interpersonal disputes between contributors ## Implementation Automated posting via GitHub Actions, extending the existing Mastodon model to all platforms. ## Amendments This policy may be amended by RFC with 2/3 majority approval.