Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:50619 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 98886 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2010 11:51:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 27 Nov 2010 11:51:11 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=chx1975@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=chx1975@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.170 as permitted sender) DomainKey-Status: bad X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: chx1975@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.214.170 mail-iw0-f170.google.com Received: from [209.85.214.170] ([209.85.214.170:33513] helo=mail-iw0-f170.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 11/42-14402-CA0F0FC4 for ; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 06:51:09 -0500 Received: by iwn4 with SMTP id 4so587008iwn.29 for ; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 03:51:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:sender:received:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=Fkt7Ab44FQc+DzeXamy08pn9VjJGoHpvE8ew9Me13Hg=; b=UGEJCsQ8MuAsa5O/pfYBbENhQKSB67aQ//3EqPxXAsjdv0wafjuGz0WP5IBI1r+yj2 qD8SBQ7I9C1kFEjcs6qA2guqCVLyzI2mRZXHQinTJkxG5qv8PzARn5Mc6X8H3+xiSD2T yqjaRt7KOAEJsoDWFCYvagoAPdVtWsGeENm1g= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:from:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id :subject:to:content-type; b=Hj++x1SpX7lU9shy2ON4PGpt5ki8XBhY3Bdc1P+HuNDrOEE03Ohk+I6QxCUR62pcrN QGhAuvXUITwRHnIxs2Vdfo90WDgbT3Ou+fomoeoqJAzQlrfkbGxusoWJhRBBQqm84OE/ 2HgKWR8Yx4HAfMMLbMPHWbjgmZo2k2BCbJ7Ls= Received: by 10.231.143.148 with SMTP id v20mr2793950ibu.167.1290858663917; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 03:51:03 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: chx1975@gmail.com Received: by 10.231.15.71 with HTTP; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 03:50:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 03:50:43 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: hDDXnDK3NbMWGyWw4VhwQgByXhM Message-ID: To: internals@lists.php.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: Major release for BC?? From: karoly@negyesi.net (Karoly Negyesi) Hi, I am reading the 5.4 vs 7.0 debate. And, here's something I really need to follow up on: "We should reserve major versions for BC breaks. Just like we've always done". If that's what you've always done then it's not PHP I spent practically every awake minute in the last seven or so years. If backwards compatibility break would mean a new PHP major we would be in somewhere PHP 43 or something :D Seriously. From PHP x.y.z to PHP x.y.z+1 things can change in ways that require code change. That's in my books a backwards compatibility break. Sometimes major ones. The biggest one, I think, was the order change of session write / close handlers vs destructors in 5.0.5. I also remember minor versions adding new arguments that can't be passed in code running on older PHP because unlike userspace functions, these complain about extra arguments. (Wish I remember what it was. stream_wrapper_register with flags being new in 5.2.4? Would need to dig in our archives a bit.) Do not think I am trying to criticize PHP development. I am aware its an open source software and scratch my own itch or get lost. I remember debating a bit about backwards compatibility on this list but I still couldnt resist writing this mail. I just wanted to make sure this argument is not used in the PHP 5.4 vs 7.0 'cos it's totally invalid and never was valid in the first place. tl;dr the PHP developers have a false belief in not breaking backwards compatibility in minor releases. Regards Karoly Negyesi