Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:65318 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 52194 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2013 07:39:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 29 Jan 2013 07:39:46 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=larry@garfieldtech.com; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=larry@garfieldtech.com; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain garfieldtech.com from 66.111.4.29 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: larry@garfieldtech.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 66.111.4.29 out5-smtp.messagingengine.com Received: from [66.111.4.29] ([66.111.4.29:38793] helo=out5-smtp.messagingengine.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 6A/E4-28517-1CC77015 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2013 02:39:45 -0500 Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.42]) by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75C1820B0E for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2013 02:39:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend1.nyi.mail.srv.osa ([10.202.2.160]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 29 Jan 2013 02:39:42 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=smtpout; bh=Dd5Oceu/ttzCYtjY6Wc3dW vf2ko=; b=U00ZpOIDXprrnd98QU1sYpVOzKhTPQddwEaeu99RzXIFlcRYmbCgVc UOFl+XsNj4HVVx+FOrvsB2ULfo38d0FkBTL2ckeD3mfUVGrJylNcyrLvOKSluh8Q 1A7rjjkuw5SyHnFCB74xrGdqYPC9TRNortOB3su4ElYcDZWNQM3Go= X-Sasl-enc: wmMka0jn9OHfsgrh6ZrD7+JFhuB5YCrjITPCCIQKQDA3 1359445182 Received: from [192.168.42.21] (unknown [98.220.238.115]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 216678E08BE for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2013 02:39:42 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <51077CBD.5060906@garfieldtech.com> Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 01:39:41 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130106 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <76a9565b2a095a72063a68f106a6b457@mail.gmail.com> <5ed6711b24349c82b7c17dd450ff7c80@mail.gmail.com> <7165e8331e1070234771f7ae9573cdf8@mail.gmail.com> <5106690E.6040908@zerocue.com> <510679E0.1050603@zerocue.com> <510739F0.80602@rotorised.com> <51077649.8010705@garfieldtech.com> <51077A8E.40806@rotorised.com> In-Reply-To: <51077A8E.40806@rotorised.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Voting periods From: larry@garfieldtech.com (Larry Garfield) On 01/29/2013 01:30 AM, Ryan McCue wrote: >> If Wordpress announced that it was going to start requiring PHP 5.3 as >> of some date 6+ months in the future (and there are advantages to doing >> so that don't require major BC breaking rewrites), I think you'd see a >> rather significant abandonment of PHP 5.2 among hosts. Many other major >> projects already have. I would be rather surprised if Drupal 9 doesn't >> require PHP 5.4. (Drupal 8, currently in development, is very solidly >> PHP 5.3.) > Here's hoping that Drupal can lead that push with the major hosts. 5.2 > on 66% of hosts is ridiculous, and I'm personally sick of having to > backport things to 5.2. GoPHP5 was a *fantastic* effort and benefited WP > immensely even if we weren't directly involved. It's great to hear you say that, given that the messaging coming out of WP at the time was rather hostile. :-) > Most of the WordPress committers don't see much advantage with pushing > to 5.3 though, so it's doubtful that we'll lead that charge. (Late > static binding is probably the only thing that they would see as useful, > but WP doesn't use many static methods.) I don't know much if anything about WP internals, but in my experience with Drupal 8 LSB is about the only 5.3 feature that hasn't mattered to us. Namespaces/PSR-0 and closures have been very helpful. LSB not so much, but then I'm pleased to say we have very little static method use in the first place. > This all said, the internal dynamics of the WordPress core developers > are always changing, and views are definitely becoming less > conservative. I don't think you'll see us targeting 5.4 any time soon, > but 5.3 is a possibility. I've been talking to a few contacts from the > big hosts in the WP space and it seems like they've all got 5.3 > upgrading in the pipeline. Maybe next year it will be time for a GoPHP5.5 project. :-) Hopefully by then WP will have become less conservative enough to join the effort. --Larry Garfield