Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:117475 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 70066 invoked from network); 4 Apr 2022 16:20:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 4 Apr 2022 16:20:41 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A7FF1804D9 for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2022 10:50:25 -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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-wm1-f52.google.com (mail-wm1-f52.google.com [209.85.128.52]) (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, 4 Apr 2022 10:50:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-f52.google.com with SMTP id r11-20020a1c440b000000b0038ccb70e239so2547530wma.3 for ; Mon, 04 Apr 2022 10:50:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language :from:to:references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=vhVjUKIMmZUtAOmdNNyH5NUcMJXWo4Ussg1CfYttMlw=; b=foQeZossp4HryuzYt792DZI3moLWW2tIqfXY2hz5iED4aVYP6pSidHY1krxpTubkHQ x/fQmcPVjhA7Skdg0+HCbsjhMaDYZ5eiSRUlcsEboWGfeJwejxhbnrdNtPNOeFrzaWk1 wpUy/KM1FV5BUPipaNj4AmGO9W/uWdeKdQMHQE5BIlw5HHum6tGtMXQotiUMSR/XohSM EnjLPL/cowqwGXv9ZOn/u5tYuqJVQuiIDX8fQ72fyWoHfILeS8/NsBIwGHKfaS2WTyFH FBkJOCkxC7HMVVrhFJo33kdvm33tCjvViqhe93RfUMH7OPfkwbEf8GwTyw+KaIixzC2G n6Lg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:from:to:references:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=vhVjUKIMmZUtAOmdNNyH5NUcMJXWo4Ussg1CfYttMlw=; b=ZUm+k1MRY0PA6guyIWRA573q+Cgg9FxWNkljU8wkyhOIAjFNzp1KWn74webAhfFFzC o2ywj+o/+bXgxvsNmvuEv2co6rInZobFDdm4lqSmzCIghL2xtr5tzg+8IX1PKRy1C+mV uuYdAg5/1FsVY0SKGKoiZ1BqNVaaRjfbfnI0B3E0VBpZ8Dnw1dkfutOTauclLcRp0Q/L Ahzxq8r/LuBPFnh03y7UljerdscqYskzfn0xBIgbsYLCIseOzFE2mVrygsPfdxIg4DOJ rdWwfSmsuCE1wznpVw2tZvOpLMCZJ8wJG2sUPu5UbUtuk1NkBZnBWnIcns8Y1tIAEcFT OpMw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531yyDSQ1TW+8WeEq2hko22irMKq/VOe0u+ciOWi48rPpSjaG0Su VwDZs/fi6baBHJJzV01W1nVCEmPhw68= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxDScXJ7/XjOmapn8BYPci0wplgJNTpElgq/mkLv5/UMe7P7ZqPCmkNhvVxFSCRlTLOMrqsxg== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:46c5:0:b0:38e:6a96:1aa0 with SMTP id t188-20020a1c46c5000000b0038e6a961aa0mr258973wma.186.1649094623452; Mon, 04 Apr 2022 10:50:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.22] (cpc104104-brig22-2-0-cust548.3-3.cable.virginm.net. [82.10.58.37]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id a1-20020a056000188100b002041a652dfdsm9937008wri.25.2022.04.04.10.50.22 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 04 Apr 2022 10:50:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2022 18:50:21 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0 Content-Language: en-GB To: internals@lists.php.net References: <22242169-a16d-5261-696c-3cf00b00336a@gmail.com> <0b322a3e-469a-7ed7-16e3-0b76287f4091@gmail.com> <623BAFB6.4000901@adviesenzo.nl> <19112CBA-7BA7-4AA8-95BF-76EE20ECE56C@cschneid.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Deprecate and Remove utf8_encode and utf8_decode From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Tommins) On 26/03/2022 22:22, Rowan Tommins wrote: > Maybe I'm trying to be "too helpful" there. Should we just use the > generic deprecation message, and let people look up the in-depth > explanation in the manual? I've dropped the custom deprecation message from the proposal, as there's just not room for the subtlety I was trying to get across. I will open voting this time tomorrow unless anyone has any further comments. Regards, -- Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]