Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:69752 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 83308 invoked from network); 22 Oct 2013 10:00:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 22 Oct 2013 10:00:20 -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 198.187.29.239 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ajf@ajf.me X-Host-Fingerprint: 198.187.29.239 imap1-1.ox.registrar-servers.com Received: from [198.187.29.239] ([198.187.29.239:37356] helo=imap1-1.ox.registrar-servers.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 72/FC-10840-2BC46625 for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 06:00:19 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by oxmail.registrar-servers.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D2DA20007A for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 06:00:16 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at imap1.ox.registrar-servers.com Received: from oxmail.registrar-servers.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (imap1.ox.registrar-servers.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id U4ZG82Vs5oc8 for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 06:00:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.0.200] (unknown [94.3.245.95]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by oxmail.registrar-servers.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 906F5200075 for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 06:00:15 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <52664CA6.2080900@ajf.me> Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 11:00:06 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:25.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/25.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] session_regenerate_id(true) by default From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds) On 22/10/2013 10:12, Derick Rethans wrote: > > You can't just change subtle details like this. Big changes are a lot > easier to manage for users, but changing defaults that have a subtle > impact on already existing code are a bad idea in my book. > I agree with Derick here. People are already calling it with (true), so I don't see a problem. If the () behaviour is an issue, put a warning in the manual, perhaps. -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/