Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:105237 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 76024 invoked from network); 11 Apr 2019 13:30:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-vs1-f53.google.com) (209.85.217.53) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 11 Apr 2019 13:30:56 -0000 Received: by mail-vs1-f53.google.com with SMTP id s2so3168142vsi.5 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 03:28:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Syorq6peh5GC3VpVeLyY4ewTEtRl2ycf+xDXWOulZRs=; b=WDmHgvpletWhHWgPnFKMq+N5OT8bJeJ6HG6OHmwcKSvkwHn72qerVHUIBqZrKYEV+c GlCICIJf/1MN9ESZq7leEA0Igj3YVjIzMv+A7LIghoMH23e+fDGQyK2ocLNXezP1ifnV NtmfDyjJycllUtB+nw0q6T3E0GPvpZ5ZX9wSX5T8KkUPlvPkLAVrW7+K9VSavmWQVOak 8OcwnoUO+kV0nxO6fxPA3sdPt57ht30BcouwCKj/dDrw/u3blon+bULCn7HHiIaSqIWN Ugxelk/fvHqv+RFUaqThGi4rZTUrH/07kp7S0MGHP+V9sRfMgWbqstcE9c3lIVUIhC56 dCdg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Syorq6peh5GC3VpVeLyY4ewTEtRl2ycf+xDXWOulZRs=; b=R16eWnHhZPvM+Nt0YDIxiox1lRotGSwnQm/dD0Lk+8O55KW8x3Fv0sq4DeTNOoZjwL OO+hW+TjQ1qP10B4MtPqM44nE2LXYA2ovX7hAd3Dq21TRdMMUBypo5JbUpkh1Zl7q0Wo KQjWNuoj/JXDa0+VZuTYFB6BgSOj/KWXjFxkfiAtJI65DQS0n0ddLKCBu3RazOLZz6TQ npM4F4OqK7sXyYSvV4ZA6UkPkjQM779RoM1SHX52q6Uh5Skle4V4wvwdXarz9tJ+PbkE zLx297gpg1KdbhAQ6oflEmPpoZyNu3RJun0OrQ1uuMTESJuW76dLs0hc4TozyKj7ifHo NKOg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXEP9Q8Cpn+GuzD9JhhT2k1XGjqdAZR0hkJzrv7GyFH2EYYQOJV EzgK3IyxZLbCGZ9QoZrinRw+LGAq1SVaDddvx6A= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwc8xncA7MgsCAJgb8h0UX4DIESGuBHScKFRVmTCkPoD6ycsC3SoCC9SLBgqAyvffM4eWDMEbhUvzRbFzI3Gsg= X-Received: by 2002:a67:8e0a:: with SMTP id q10mr28437051vsd.56.1554978498131; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 03:28:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 12:27:48 +0200 Message-ID: To: Peter Cowburn Cc: PHP internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000003bb4905863ea534" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [VOTE] Deprecate PHP's short open tags From: george.banyard@gmail.com ("G. P. B.") --00000000000003bb4905863ea534 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, 11 Apr 2019 at 12:14, Peter Cowburn wrote: > > > On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 at 11:44, G. P. B. wrote: > >> Hello Internals, >> >> As there have been no further comments the voting for my RFC [1] to >> deprecate PHP's >> short open tags has started and will run for two (2) weeks. >> > > Firstly, I apologize for not mentioning this before the vote was opened. > > Does the primary (it's probably not fair to call it that, for this RFC) > vote include changing the default (php -n) from On to Off? That's what is > specified in the very concise proposal section, so it seems reasonable to > assume it's the case, but I just want to be sure since the actual vote > question doesn't mention changing the default value. > > With the current state of voting, it is looking like we could end up such > that we don't deprecate (and disable by default, maybe) the feature, but > jump straight to removing it. That's not usually how feature removal > works. It would've been better, IMO, to just take the proposal > ("Deprecate and disable short_open_tag in PHP 7.4 and remove PHP's short > open tags in PHP 8.0.") and make that a yes/no vote. > Hello Peter, For changing the default from On to Off it more something I realised during the implementation of the patch that the in-engine default is "On", which I found to be unexpected (probably because the doc says it's only enabled with a compile flag) so I changed it. But the default could stay the same as I'm starting to realise that with current state of voting we are getting kind of a mess of a split vote as you said. It would have been nice that someone would have noticed the problems with the voting structure before I start it but not to sure how to proceed. I don't know if people vote against the deprecation notice in PHP 7.4 as the default value changes because if this is the case maybe leaving the default as is and only deprecating would be better? Also I do agree that having deprecation notices before a feature removal is wise but from my understanding the RFC which removed the ASP tags also didn't have deprecation notices, so there is already a precedent for removing features without warning (not that I agree with it). So not sure how to proceed ATM and some more feedback would be probably necessary as it is my first RFC. Best regards George P. Banyard --00000000000003bb4905863ea534--