Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:61905 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 38728 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2012 06:28:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 1 Aug 2012 06:28:24 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 67.192.241.123 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.192.241.123 smtp123.dfw.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [67.192.241.123] ([67.192.241.123:35664] helo=smtp123.dfw.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 02/11-32875-78CC8105 for ; Wed, 01 Aug 2012 02:28:24 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp12.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 94D2A3C0105; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 02:28:20 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp12.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id 172933C0020; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 02:28:20 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <5018CC83.4030002@sugarcrm.com> Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 23:28:19 -0700 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lester Caine CC: PHP internals References: <50163FAD.4020004@lsces.co.uk> <5016A5A8.50506@lerdorf.com> <5018CA7E.5070802@lsces.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <5018CA7E.5070802@lsces.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Bringing users along ... From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > The current raft of PHP problems arise from the fact that "we actually put a lot > of emphasis on not breaking backward compatibility" seems just to be lip service > to the real problem ... Taking stuff out in PHP5.4 would be fine if people are So what would happen if it would be real BC? I mean, if you want 5.4, we need to make some changes. Some of these changes will make either impossible or impractical to support broken code, and some broken code warnings were actually requested by the users. So I see one of the two ways: 1. Ignore our users asking for warnings on broken code, since somebody might have problems upgrading when his code is broken. 2. Listen to our users asking for warning on broken code, and prefer future clean code to old broken one. Do you see any third way to do? If so, please describe. > Helping to solve the problem would also help everybody else upgrade TO PHP5.4? OK, so what help do you require? > Add to this the fun getting Apache 2.4 configured with PHP and my old framework, > it is no wonder I grumpy ... I would much rather be adding functionality and > working on NEW stuff than fixing the problems other people leave behind. And I > don't need any of the new PHP5.3/44 features to write my own new code. While I can sympathize with your problems fixing bad code left by other people, I am not sure how it is relevant on this list - is there something that people present on this list can help you with? What is it? -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227