Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:78790 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 88709 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2014 07:44:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 6 Nov 2014 07:44:02 -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 217.147.176.214 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.147.176.214 mail4-2.serversure.net Linux 2.6 Received: from [217.147.176.214] ([217.147.176.214:45260] helo=mail4.serversure.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 52/CA-28384-FB62B545 for ; Thu, 06 Nov 2014 02:44:00 -0500 Received: (qmail 5278 invoked by uid 89); 6 Nov 2014 07:43:56 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.3.1 ppid: 5272, pid: 5275, t: 0.1641s scanners: attach: 1.3.1 clamav: 0.96/m:52/d:10677 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.0.0.8?) (lester@rainbowdigitalmedia.org.uk@86.163.79.60) by mail4.serversure.net with ESMTPA; 6 Nov 2014 07:43:56 -0000 Message-ID: <545B26BB.9020406@lsces.co.uk> Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2014 07:43:55 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <3E2593DC-5755-48A6-8802-6F2FB3625778@ajf.me> <04723EAD-4C8E-41C2-BE81-4989882A0C69@ajf.me> In-Reply-To: <04723EAD-4C8E-41C2-BE81-4989882A0C69@ajf.me> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Thresholds of backwards compatibility breaks From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) On 06/11/14 02:27, Andrea Faulds wrote: >> We have minor BC breaks (new errors. Slight behavior changes due to bug fixes). >> > >> > But globally no, it makes end users work harder for migration, even worst for distros. >> > >> > See Debian f.e., they boost the adoption speed now, we finally see some results, within the 2-4 years plan we had back then. I could not imagine a worst time to rollback what we defined. >> > > Ah, you raise a good point there. It’d be a shame if distros stopped shipping new minor versions of PHP. > > Alright then. Perhaps, instead, the solution is more frequent majors, with less BC breaks each. Hindsight is a wonderful thing ... While yes one can run PHP5.2 code on PHP5.4 by hiding everything that PHP5.4 does not like, in the real world trying to run the two side by side simply does not work. PHP5.4 was essentially a major version - if you assume that e_strict failures have to be fixed. IF 5.4 had been released as PHPNext then those of us who have to live with the fallout COULD have managed legacy code with PHP5.3. Yes it is only a number, but a lot more problematic changes WERE pushed through across those three versions which would have been much safer handled by removing e_strict from PHP5.4 rather than trying to live with both versions of PHP. -- 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