Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:61871 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 41822 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2012 09:14:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 30 Jul 2012 09:14:39 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lester@lsces.co.uk; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lester@lsces.co.uk; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lsces.co.uk from 213.123.26.185 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 213.123.26.185 c2beaomr07.btconnect.com Received: from [213.123.26.185] ([213.123.26.185:13348] helo=mail.btconnect.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 71/53-16347-E7056105 for ; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 05:14:38 -0400 Received: from host81-138-11-136.in-addr.btopenworld.com (EHLO _10.0.0.5_) ([81.138.11.136]) by c2beaomr07.btconnect.com with ESMTP id IKY90219; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:14:34 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <50165078.40107@lsces.co.uk> Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:14:32 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120604 Firefox/13.0 SeaMonkey/2.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: PHP internals References: <50163FAD.4020004@lsces.co.uk> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mirapoint-IP-Reputation: reputation=Fair-1, source=Queried, refid=tid=0001.0A0B0303.50165079.0104, actions=tag X-Junkmail-Premium-Raw: score=7/50, refid=2.7.2:2012.7.30.81225:17:7.944, ip=81.138.11.136, rules=__MOZILLA_MSGID, __HAS_MSGID, __SANE_MSGID, __FW_1LN_BOT_MSGID, __HAS_FROM, __USER_AGENT, __MIME_VERSION, __TO_MALFORMED_2, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT, __CT, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN, __CTE, __ANY_URI, __URI_NO_MAILTO, __URI_NO_WWW, __CP_URI_IN_BODY, __PHISH_PHRASE11, BODY_ENDS_IN_URL, BODY_SIZE_3000_3999, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY, RDNS_GENERIC_POOLED, HTML_00_01, HTML_00_10, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS, RDNS_SUSP_GENERIC, RDNS_SUSP, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/50, host=c2beaomr07.btconnect.com X-Junkmail-Signature-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A0B0209.5016507A.010E:SCFSTAT14830815,ss=1,re=-4.000,fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2011-07-25 19:15:43, dmn=2011-05-27 18:58:46, mode=multiengine X-Junkmail-IWF: false Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Bringing users along ... From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) Adam Harvey wrote: > What, specifically, have you found that isn't covered in the release > notes and/or migration guide for PHP 5.3 and 5.4? Documentation bugs > would be awesome here. (Patches would be even more awesome.) > > It's hard to improve this without detailed information, since the > migration guides feel reasonably complete at this point. I'm appealing here to the developers who use that information !!!! The latest problem was with a 'TIKI' which stopped working after a 'security update', but the newer version did not bother to check that 5.3 was available and it messed up on the customers 5.2 setup. I've helped with several problems over the last few months, either down to PHP version changes or project changes that did not watch for what PHP version was running. >> So what is the best way of getting the user base behind us using even PHP5.4 >> so that any discussion of even more changes in PHP6 makes sense at all? > > The same chicken and egg scenario once existed around PHP 5. The > community saw the merit in PHP 5 (5.2, specifically), and created > gophp5.org (now squatted, sadly) which was a rather successful > campaign to raise awareness of the issue, and ended with the situation > we're now in where most actively-developed frameworks and projects > require PHP 5.2 or 5.3 and use their features. (It's also worth > remembering that the BC concerns aren't as drastic for a lot of people > as they seem to be for you, Lester — a lot of codebases seem to have > been migrated from PHP 4 to 5 with little to no hassle.) I'm still making sure that upgrades run on 5.2, but I've had to set up a 5.2, 5.3 and 5.4 setups to make sure of that. The hassle at the moment is just silly little things that the developer could quite easily avoided if they also still considered the end users situation? When a users site goes down, THEY tend not to be competent enough to fix the problem ... and then saying 'you need to upgrade php' is even less helpful. Migration can be made hassle free, but WE need to make that happen! Some of the black holes created by PHP5.3 and 5.4 are well documented, but unless developers take the care to work around them sites go down, and then getting an ISP to fix the background installation is not necessarily easy. > So I think the answer, largely, is "build it and they will come". > > I'm not claiming that our migration documentation or BC are perfect as > they stand. They can always be improved. But beyond documentation, I'm > not sure what else we can do from Internals, short of sticking a fork > in the language, calling it done, and never adding another feature. In hindsight PHP5.3 should have been labelled PHP6 and the 5.2 supported a little longer. 60% of the world still has the latest identified security problems in their installations :( It's Internals that decides when a version is dropped, but I don't think enough consideration was given this time to the end users? ( I'm looking again at another distribution since SUSE seems to in something of a mire at the moment :( But having used it since the late 90's ... ) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk