Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:115301 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 58206 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2021 11:59:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 5 Jul 2021 11:59:37 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EB331804D1 for ; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 05:21:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-ua1-f50.google.com (mail-ua1-f50.google.com [209.85.222.50]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 05:21:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ua1-f50.google.com with SMTP id y20so3355881uap.10 for ; Mon, 05 Jul 2021 05:21:06 -0700 (PDT) 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=MqNFehl1U8oIEBinoRy0leyhx9Ou5X1X5ThCUXgpSIE=; b=CJPBDRf+4Pm1j9n9o+yE6OhJEHqqjfWx4Uh7qa9Eeq8SLO22W1u2F8UE3cQn9NMbPX wcEzyTJyU2Wrvv1CJHaObIJKg2l5XkHI7vqKnBR8/FOvtWJJy+AVF/7CjZrs2OAd3XTT gGiFZbV8abuySy0uSTKxX57aFoKcA1Petu8VZGZ5nlPpUeQRPVcIAAtVktnyTo3elTsf V2T4IQNFvnZfQFQJY9IMKI0xlTn/GV8JzjRRN2TksIm54YY2qRNFo9f8VSm/d0wofIpV 0aKyJ+zbcXM+sEiJtl0ZUOTVPBf+G3dtE07ieCk98/DsOIC+x8NQWYfUsswiCOxaxa08 LdGg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533bM76VYArwojPowiAULEJMmNMCSX27Kh+YWOGEuDge1oBrf3YO hxUnrC4Ay0X9ssZWjISWtNFuQ7oIo3/WDNdgGg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy/Ag1ID5MyKjzLXGeOqFozMYpqAVZZzUO0T4133qxOKpIV57iNUrqMh7DXDMcLL6gf1M9UD1g4AUU2PhrnIKc= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:7c58:: with SMTP id d24mr9667727uaw.95.1625487665429; Mon, 05 Jul 2021 05:21:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1dcefcec-a3e4-e773-4950-b11d377ecc7f@gmail.com> <122F660D-DE94-4DFE-A0E9-FEC202E89E3A@newclarity.net> In-Reply-To: <122F660D-DE94-4DFE-A0E9-FEC202E89E3A@newclarity.net> Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2021 14:20:54 +0200 Message-ID: To: Mike Schinkel Cc: Rowan Tommins , PHP Development Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e27e8a05c65f56c6" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Deprecations for PHP 8.1 From: patrickallaert@php.net (Patrick ALLAERT) --000000000000e27e8a05c65f56c6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Le lun. 5 juil. 2021 =C3=A0 13:39, Mike Schinkel a = =C3=A9crit : > > On Jul 5, 2021, at 7:14 AM, Rowan Tommins > wrote: > > > > On 05/07/2021 11:46, Patrick ALLAERT wrote: > >> Did we ever deprecated something without the immediate intention of > >> removing it? > > > > > > What would that even mean? > > It would mean that although the functions are available and allowed, they > are not recommended[1]. > Exactly my point. The fact that it gets deprecated with a notice gets much more visibility than just documentation changes (which I encourage anyway!). > > Surely a deprecation, by definition, is a notice that something is goin= g > to be removed. > > I know that you, and others on this list, have chosen to define > deprecation as including removal, but that is actually not the accepted > definition on the web, nor is it in any way a requirement, it is just you= r > preference. > > Indirectly from Wikipedia and voted as the top answer on StackOverflow > here[2] (emphasis MINE): > > "deprecation is a status applied to software features to indicate that > they should be avoided, typically because they have been superseded. > Although deprecated features remain in the software, their use may raise > warning messages recommending alternative practices, and deprecation MAY > indicate that the feature will be removed in the future." > > So I am arguing for the legitimacy of retaining "deprecated" features if > their removal would cause significant BC breakage, I'm not just trying to > be a pendant. > --000000000000e27e8a05c65f56c6--