Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:118901 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 24805 invoked from network); 28 Oct 2022 16:59:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 28 Oct 2022 16:59:17 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DE941804BA for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 09:59:16 -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=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT, FREEMAIL_FROM,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,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: AS8560 212.227.0.0/16 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.15]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 09:59:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.de; s=s31663417; t=1666976334; bh=jSWJMBloYBa9uTcuqfvwpB99SmyHn2T8MO83S4Lxtsw=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=fJiYk4L5q8IhsyGvOp4Ldev3UF15GLpsFq3JBOQKMmlQaBLYkBV0Ty/BEdRfKgnf5 I7sWx/Y8tYLZ13d79rhp28RmsPDXShcoOy6VBXZ1JLeVw7fVMLV1MR31la66XEK1oY pJ9WyDwatM5K3eR3IZrQdc/x5A3n4chpYKB2A1Un310hMr4D8ublV+XSpYBF0BHx94 du4anwuwIOLJrPEU32a7iY/ckcjdlH13KCynQ4JIE6zCyqOEB8h5Z+XOcdVwoNyjA5 5YVSXxrqy77a/jHSsbljrPmZ7H2XMfaParMCpVmpXK8XpUMgEkWJgHkETnqXYmwWeX 9Brga2aYAGGbQ== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Received: from [192.168.2.130] ([79.220.80.221]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx005 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MpDJd-1pPlj71vvL-00qfLL; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 18:58:54 +0200 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 18:58:54 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.4.1 To: Jeffrey Dafoe , =?UTF-8?Q?Tim_D=c3=bcsterhus?= , PHP internals References: <22177032-fe72-c39b-63fe-fa4368a70852@bastelstu.be> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:4Nn0qZAoMFhCmEpHqF/YBQcLpF34349S+aynWMKzgU5uZnnTr3s U0ngeTs0v0DBzPVJrSbFGd9R3+finOql7DC8MQK+F2YAKQXgCnK/fZkhSBJuLZXGBfjPCDU SHnthSJhRVQvJGjfr2F/ZTQNXhuLNab4OXWcbfQhNAjnvJzkUIJpuqoHR7IstBiJGhsBkae EPmufojcGAtOy5NrFhQyg== UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:00wLK4Tle28=;4oRlhxs3rwNtsLFIy7TMScMMyBz J1MtlqXU41InpkqBFM949vhZkDB7RgxkDjfyL9DJIaEGMloBKEV5maNY8ZGb7DmNgKwG7uFy+ 3DB/dYFjtptUvjPqCmpaFNtY7POg8IZzqs2dLieRbYqoeW30rD43DuTBry3UVtDjYH0CUQb1s Arx4tC8mlVDdnDAFAya9oFC+mt9o0ODxtwOXI7QX6FUnsEeZNaP8d9o4Ma+84bJWE9c0a9+3U cu1H/XFYuJD0dRY5sDpUgH36iiyQK5Pjrbw1M2wjNv2qHnqN2D60HO+1WZ6p6auVR9zROl1gZ c1Ct1FbJUJe/oFtnAAUKghoiueMNx/mzQl4aowEOgAjlBsn5sZXt023RCbQ1NUsgFIIw/WfN0 wrPdc5Sru15oD4JZKzrV3cQej4KQd0irhnYTPeBpRn57NfBdgdGyWIT5kcMcpEMiQZsWyJ5rj dFbyMNVJ8TDzkjElrhRcKbxQF3hgPm5eLvnswfoSDPr7wlIADh79pRfOw9O/otShUNDvoMxiT kjd2J/pPtMSjGNnnnuQvibFAuVGRhUd5kur4/Kc1aO9V+s5n/YR1LaGowRkrci+nOoxiFGb2E jqPNCaM9r3sK7cfoz9zB+50wZYgAWqPNKQBw+kM7JMs2f8RYdl+BlynWUo/nSR8zE4lRbVwGb lnqVTlCzFw5ygVyqjPtMRiJDtrQzTZ6hvKPV796hQGSsd0xRbdunJNsha3Q9+NFzdlZ8Zu1gh I9Vf/nQnZPE7n2g1YhNDDS2VgAAfbMr6g1dZtOZ75YmcoALQ84KRSBJrB93VmNEPLVv0s//yT xym9RpLenJ075pAiEqYFWCH5RJP7GzSmPYAdtalHW3uNAuLlszzgroRQPSIQseQnP0HdOZ+yD S92j7uv/O/ggB7eZHnXFCuLXCHpO5IlfibMQ6GF27LxDs8CDJfrAruUTQLMlDzCTylUhklsRQ xIOCHQ== Subject: Re: RE: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Improve unserialize() error handling From: cmbecker69@gmx.de ("Christoph M. Becker") On 28.10.2022 at 18:25, Jeffrey Dafoe wrote: >> a) "Add the \UnserializationFailedException and wrap any Throwables in = PHP >> 8.x?" >> >> This proposal was declined with 20 (Yes) to 12 (No) Votes (62.5%). >> >> b) "Increase the severity of emitted E_NOTICE to E_WARNING in PHP 8.x?" >> >> This proposal was accepted with 33 (Yes) to 2 (No) Votes (94.3%). >> >> c) "Throw \UnserializationFailedException instead of emitting >> E_NOTICE/E_WARNING in PHP 9.0?" >> >> This proposal depends on declined proposal (a) and thus results will be >> disregarded. It would have been accepted with 23 (Yes) to 8 (No) Votes >> (74.2%). > > Informally, doesn't this mean that voters wanted a and c in PHP9? Does t= his vote mean it's dead for 9, or just that it needs a vote at some point = in the future with the choices grouped different? Right; at least that is what I'd like to have. =2D- Christoph M. Becker