Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:36736
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.200.175 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=IfDVtgsn81XPZh/Fho2HtG5fq5sqI+MfyW/QMViHb6kVfnqfR/P45Fti2G7AO42QkeXcJ40fFgYkX4pmNiYPo5EA9wsL9jeqjcnnnjaPAMCzQrjqX8wzI5GwZ0Cl9IwawKnj/LZcKir4PXajlFx1/GWu4+jFJpsPSqwLv3MT1rI=
Message-ID: <7f3ed2c30803311525r39f8c040h68ae4c4fe2018ba1@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 00:25:59 +0200
To: "Pierre Joye" <pierre.php@gmail.com>
Cc: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Johannes_Schl=FCter?=" <johannes@php.net>, 
	"Marcus Boerger" <helly@php.net>, "Derick Rethans" <derick@php.net>, 
	"Marco Kaiser" <marco.kaiser@gmail.com>, 
	"PHP Developers Mailing List" <internals@lists.php.net>, 
	php-qa@lists.php.net, "Ilia Alshanetsky" <ilia@prohost.org>
In-Reply-To: <fe05d1540803311522h5c2b2adcqe17997fab903121e@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <a2b4d2820803270125w1c167b3fmbd721458457f3643@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1124764115.20080327105033@marcus-boerger.de>
	 <47eb9d50.02e2660a.759d.2e19@mx.google.com>
	 <alpine.DEB.0.98.0803301729300.2627@kossu.ez.no>
	 <826883759.20080331171437@marcus-boerger.de>
	 <1206998314.2941.6.camel@goldfinger>
	 <fe05d1540803311522h5c2b2adcqe17997fab903121e@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] BC break with php 5.2.6
From: hannes.magnusson@gmail.com ("Hannes Magnusson")

On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 12:22 AM, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 11:18 PM, Johannes Schl=FCter <johannes@php.net> =
wrote:
>  > Marcus,
>  >
>  >
>  >  On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 17:14 +0200, Marcus Boerger wrote:
>  >  > Hello Derick,
>  >  >
>  >  >   it is a BUG FIX. Not fixing it means more people will turn it int=
o a
>  >  > feature and we will never be able to remove it. Becuase next time y=
ou
>  >  > will say we cannot remove it in a minor version as by then you acci=
dentally
>  >  > rely on it yourself.
>  >  >
>  >  > We made a mistake! Lets stand up and admit we did. Probably I was i=
nvolved
>  >  > in making that mistake, so sorry. Done.
>  >
>  >  I have to agree with Derick here we shouldn't add a fatal error withi=
n a
>  >  bug fix release at such a place. People (hosters...) tend to update
>  >  versions without checking all incompatibilities - since you don't exp=
ect
>  >  them and they want to get security issues fixed.
>  >
>  >  Yes, the previous behavior was wrong! Yes we shouldn't encourage peop=
le
>  >  do do that.
>  >
>  >  I'd propose making it an Warning or something in 5.2 and fixing it in
>  >  5.3.
>
>  E_DEPRECATED  is more appropriate.

In 5.2? 5.2 doesn't have E_DEPRECATED and this should be fixed in 5.3,
not issue a warning that it will be fixed in 5.4 or 6

-Hannes