Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:62478 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 36973 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2012 12:12:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 25 Aug 2012 12:12:11 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ajf@ajf.me; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ajf@ajf.me; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain ajf.me designates 64.22.89.133 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ajf@ajf.me X-Host-Fingerprint: 64.22.89.133 oxmail.registrar-servers.com Received: from [64.22.89.133] ([64.22.89.133:44872] helo=oxmail.registrar-servers.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 8A/E5-06857-911C8305 for ; Sat, 25 Aug 2012 08:12:11 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.200] (5ad3285b.bb.sky.com [90.211.40.91]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by oxmail.registrar-servers.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C5FCA758092; Sat, 25 Aug 2012 08:12:06 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <5038C0F8.9060008@ajf.me> Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 13:11:36 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120714 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lester Caine CC: PHP internals References: <503897B4.8020303@lsces.co.uk> <5038C04D.9080509@lsces.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <5038C04D.9080509@lsces.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Older style frameworks ... From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrew Faulds) On 25/08/12 13:08, Lester Caine wrote: > Marco Pivetta wrote: >> Just wanted to remind you that the latest Smarty 2.x version is >> 2.6.26, released >> in the middle of 2009... > And our own version of Smarty2 has been maintained and updated several > times in the intervening period. It's a lot easier to fix security > holes as they are identified than going through several thousand > templates and updating them. But more difficult here is a change that > Smarty3 made which would require rewriting the whole way some > processes work in the framework :( > DO we spend time rewriting everything again, or use what we have > working and carry on developing new facilities on that? > >> 3 years have passed by, and change is something that cannot really be >> stopped. >> You can either freeze the environment and plan to re-build your >> projects or >> maintain them, applying change as it comes, or maintain the older >> software >> in-house (you will end up with something really hard to manage). >> I can suggest you (at least it works for me) to use a continuous >> integration >> environment/server and run your sites with a dependency manager like >> composer >> (or something like an svn:external to a "latest" branch of the >> dependencies). >> Running the "composer update" command, the version of the software >> used by my >> projects gets automatically bumped to the latest available one, and >> then the CI >> environment runs the tests. That doesn't ensure that 100% of >> everything will >> work, but reduces the efforts needed to keep up with changes. This >> doesn't apply >> to major version changes like Smarty 2.x -> Smarty 3.x, obviously, >> but I hope it >> helps in reducing your workload while encouraging change and making >> it smoother. >> As said by Ferenc, you cannot think of avoiding refactoring (at least >> without >> freezing the project), that's part of our job. > > How about major versions changes like PHP5.2-3-4 in some ways they are > as bad as the Smarty changes. I still feel that while 'incremental' > changes have little effect on BC, the overall set of changes from 5.2 > to 5.4 and now going on to 5.5 has resulted in a lot more areas that > need to be tidied up and often re-writen in sites that were probably > developed in PHP5.0 but work fine in 5.2. The vast majority of users > have not yet updated to 5.3, simply because their ISP's haven't, and > now we have 5.4 which ASSUMES that sites have been updated. We will > warn in 5.3 and remove in 5.4 only works if you do roll forward every > time :( > > Personally I'd avoided e_strict while I waited for some clean examples > of how the code should be done to appear ... they still haven't and > PHP5.4 came out and all the e_strict warnings became a problem. Run a > current joomla site on a stock 5.4 install ... it's unusable until you > disable all the new stuff. It took me a couple of days to get that > customers sites moved over and running again ... some still are only > holding pages ... now I need to find out why the remaining ones don't > work on PHP5.4 ... more work that I don't have time for :( > OK Lester, you've whined enough, what do you want us to do? Freeze development for 5 years so ISPs can slowly catch up, or something? -- Andrew Faulds http://ajf.me/