Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:130753
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CA+NMNO2WouLYZ9PKQSvdf=8s9WoJeod_PbwWdc6zQh8WUovhyg@mail.gmail.com>
 <3ff59f9b3d7a872dc0159651848dace8@bastelstu.be> <CA+NMNO2Y=BjuiP84Kv+4MUMTo2-EHrz8HwO5bViJRw-b9Mt8cg@mail.gmail.com>
 <46155eca0b1416f045856ef48be5c444@bastelstu.be>
In-Reply-To: <46155eca0b1416f045856ef48be5c444@bastelstu.be>
Reply-To: erictnorris@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 3 May 2026 10:14:35 -0400
Message-ID: <CA+NMNO3OvvdbWm=NVhANtyaW0Nv2EiLaO36hk90Y1dy8rhNYQQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] `COM_RESET_CONNECTION` support in `mysqlnd`
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Tim_D=C3=BCsterhus?= <tim@bastelstu.be>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: eric.t.norris@gmail.com (Eric Norris)

On Sun, May 3, 2026 at 8:01=E2=80=AFAM Tim D=C3=BCsterhus <tim@bastelstu.be=
> wrote:
>
> A single RFC with two primary votes to independently resolve each of the
> two cases (at the same time) would work. Given the concerns and the
> similarity between both, I don't think we can do without an RFC.

Fair enough. I'd appreciate your collaboration on this RFC if you're
amenable! I've started a draft here:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/min_supported_versions_php_8_6.

I have a few things to note:

- I wasn't sure how to approach the merger of the two topics. I
decided to model this like the various deprecation RFCs, in that we're
deciding on a slate of minimum supported software for PHP 8.6.
- Ideally, if people objected to the MySQL minimum version for
persistent connections, I'd be able to include a vote that allowed for
an INI setting.
- Related to that: I'm not sure how much detail to add about the
actual implementation I'd like for persistent connections. Is this a
vote for my specific implementation, or just the higher-level concept
of requiring a certain version of software in PHP 8.6? My goal is to
ship this, so needing to do two RFCs back-to-back would be annoying.

Feel free to respond privately if you'd like to take this off-list. Thanks!