Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:61056
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.217.170 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4FEF84D8.20107@sugarcrm.com>
References: <4FEF84D8.20107@sugarcrm.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2012 01:14:29 +0200
Message-ID: <CAF+90c-dbNetJJ4BiNjKrqfNWZecNj_dR1z4bAmddB6bxhUXdQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>
Cc: Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@googlemail.com>, 
	=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Johannes_Schl=FCter?= <johannes@schlueters.de>, 
	Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>, David Soria Parra <dsp@php.net>, 
	PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: JSON changes in 5.3/5.4
From: nikita.ppv@gmail.com (Nikita Popov)

On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 12:59 AM, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I see that there were significant changes committed to JSON extension in
> 5.3 and 5.4 recently. These changes modify json_encode behavior, break
> tests (pass001.1_64bit.phpt does not work anymore for me), are not
> clearly documented and have no NEWS/UPGRADING entries describing what
> exactly changed, had no RFC, use new function with name inconsistent
> with all existing functions with the same semantics
> (json_last_error_msg) and IMO do not belong in stable branches,
> especially not done this way.
>
> I intend to release 5.4.5 RC1 next week, and I want this matter to be
> cleared up before that, because I can not release it in this state. So
> we have two options here:
> 1. Revert everything to 5.4.4 state and deal with it in 5.5 or maybe in
> 5.4.6 if it'd be ready.
> 2. Have it cleaned up ASAP and brought to a state where there are no
> test failures and there's a clear description of what the changes were
> in NEWS and UPGRADING.
>
> I think option 2 is better, but if it can not happen by EOD Tuesday
> (July 3) I intend to go with option 1. Nikita, please advise how you
> prefer to proceed with this.
>
> Johannes, do you want me to revert it in 5.3 branch too in case we have
> to go with option 1?
Hi Stas!

If you are okay with the changes in principle, I will fix the
remaining issues asap. If you think that the changes are too intrusive
for release branches, I'll gladly revert them for 5.3/5.4. I didn't
quite expect that there will be so many changes.

Apart from that one test, does anything else fail for you? I didn't
notice that one test because I'm running on 32bit.

Regarding documentation, should these changes be documented in detail
in NEWS? Or does it suffice to update the documentation? For
UPGRADING, which one should it go in? Just 5.3?

Nikita