Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:105558
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAFPFaMJEn=gjk5jAAxR2bF=4Mt3r0FJCm6mbOCReOmyybtAkkg@mail.gmail.com>
 <49A4B76C-4C62-4CBE-BA20-FBE56CA29AB0@cschneid.com> <CADyq6sL7m=A=pA1rNBg_CFOoMtfCZn50AfALh9jtLHvn9NRzmw@mail.gmail.com>
 <609E93CF-099B-446C-AD28-04F1D802C9F0@cschneid.com> <000401d4fac8$ae592cf0$0b0b86d0$@roze.lv>
 <CAJHtznz-Dm7ft6qJ6Y6sjnaL4G0cwVVJyakxr_zprhxQzqUkVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFPFaML4QTbtJXLuheGwTTT204vY40TeT5TLEX22oYTNrNJ8Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJHtznwnbM54uAzStVfAOjUTgEoDr8XpOFCYdVjgrtZfFgrSJw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFPFaM+EGh6zZgSdDXo06wdY==Fujm1JFWFO88EmvggC-fdFJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJHtznztD-UOSoeSApvTMidNo6z20MUWNNBRUW84_JxM0fRq-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1904301800070.9606@singlemalt.home.derickrethans.nl>
 <CAJHtznzSOo1Xbmu3N9C_GEo6woDC0STVR_nVjUCusT65dfPe=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAfnsFWogfyZ=X07EOAZ6V4vSKw89K01WGnddRF=zRP9-FBsdg@mail.gmail.com>
 <961cee8e-8185-b7b2-2b51-838946d2c7d2@gmail.com> <CAAfnsFUhMKf1YYuT1eCF65yfX+FjNAcr_MyAiPM-fiPawTKDLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <e4ffda5e-fe34-aab2-d97e-0f6b5ce9f83a@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <e4ffda5e-fe34-aab2-d97e-0f6b5ce9f83a@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2019 18:23:15 +0700
Message-ID: <CAEZPtU5Qw6MG+Sucs45TSNR+BecyswH29n4EC2D4cLVJ5xiL2A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Kokot <peterkokot@gmail.com>, Girgias <george.banyard@gmail.com>, 
	PHP Internals List <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ffb3b50587e5dcde"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [VOTE] Deprecate PHP's short open tags
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye)

--000000000000ffb3b50587e5dcde
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Hi,

On Wed, May 1, 2019, 2:42 PM Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> > Every app will have different things to fix. So saying that this
> > particular change will break the internet is not realistic without any
> > numbers. If PHP is on a course to fix the BC break strategy then good
>
> I am not saying it will break the internet. Nobody does. What I am
> saying it creates a huge and serious risk (both operational and
> security) for people upgrading, and I am not sure why it is being
> dismissed roughly as "well, BC happens, what you gonna do..." In my
> opinion, it's not a kind of issue one should be dismissing. It's not a
> regular low-grade BC break, it's a serious and dangerous one. Probably
> one of the most dangerous - in its current state, as voted - among all
> present in the release.
>

Btw, the core can veto a rfc if it actually creates big troubles, just to
end a circular discussion.

I am not asking to do it, but this is an option if really all core
developers consider it very harmful.

best,
Pierre

>

--000000000000ffb3b50587e5dcde--