Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:79688
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain ajf.me designates 192.64.116.200 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\))
In-Reply-To: <CABBJUpfLCjWCgOUneN2O2M7qP2WBf8OgbVrdB-jm+Fn_dDJvVA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 05:51:20 +0000
Cc: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <0487E984-0BBA-4225-8215-5646A83ACF75@ajf.me>
References: <8C1EFD82-CFE0-4D01-9231-2A1658B182A6@ajf.me> <CABBJUpfLCjWCgOUneN2O2M7qP2WBf8OgbVrdB-jm+Fn_dDJvVA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Xinchen Hui <laruence@php.net>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] PHP 5.7
From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds)

Hi Xinchen,

> On 16 Dec 2014, at 04:07, Xinchen Hui <laruence@php.net> wrote:
>=20
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:
>> Good evening,
>>=20
>> There has been some debate about whether to make =E2=80=9CPHP 5.7". I =
have made a very simple RFC. It proposes a final minor version of PHP 5, =
PHP 5.7, to be released at the same time as PHP 7, with no new features =
whatsoever.
>>=20
> I am wondering why we need that?  no new features=E2=80=A6.

The reasoning behind this is to encourage people to switch to PHP 7 if =
they want new features.

> I think we can extend 5.6 release cycle to avoid that..

We could, but we wouldn=E2=80=99t be able to introduce deprecation =
notices in a 5.6 micro, so we=E2=80=99d need a new minor releases.

Also, I failed to mention it in the RFC (will do so), but for any new =
reserved words in PHP 7, we should also reserve them in 5.7.

Thanks.
--
Andrea Faulds
http://ajf.me/