Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:26198
Return-Path: <pierre.php@gmail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 40566 invoked by uid 1010); 23 Oct 2006 19:29:32 -0000
Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net
Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 40548 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2006 19:29:32 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 23 Oct 2006 19:29:32 -0000
X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.79.190.163 r163.red.fastwebserver.de  
Received: from [217.79.190.163] ([217.79.190.163:29749] helo=localhost.localdomain)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id 32/1F-39788-9181D354 for <helly@php.net>; Mon, 23 Oct 2006 15:29:31 -0400
To: internals@lists.php.net,Marcus Boerger <helly@php.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 21:29:31 +0200
Message-ID: <20061023212931.29366acc@pierre-u64>
In-Reply-To: <1485570655.20061023210857@marcus-boerger.de>
References: <1485570655.20061023210857@marcus-boerger.de>
Reply-To: pierre.php@gmail.com
X-Newsreader: Sylpheed-Claws 2.5.5 (GTK+ 2.8.20; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Posted-By: 217.79.190.163
Subject: Re: [RFC] E_DEPRECATED
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre)

On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 21:08:57 +0200
helly@php.net (Marcus Boerger) wrote:

> Hello internals,
> 
>   after recent discussions (over the last three months)I finally made
> up my mind over E_STRICT, deprecation warnings and OOP
> messages/rules. My idea proposal is to do the following:
> 
> - Add a new severity E_DEPRECATED
> 
> - severities are used as follows:
>   . E_DEPRECATED: Some language featre that is likely to go away.
> Eearlierst removal would be two minor versions or one major version
> later. That is something that gets deprecated in 5.2 can be removed
> in 5.4.0 or 6.0.0. However both marking it as deprecated as well as
> removing it would require a consensus on the list.

+1 If removed in the next major version only. -1 otherwise.

It is already a nightmare to remember or manage the various changes in
all last minor releases.

> You may respond with constructive ideas or complaints or go voting
> for all or single points here, use -1, 0, +1 only. Please do not
> reply for the sake of responding, use pure voting instead as we are
> running out of time for 5.2.0 otherwise.

+1 for the other points, even if we can expect 5.2.0 for early 2007 ;-)

-- Pierre