Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:79695
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.212.171 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <548FE4A8.4040909@beccati.com>
References: <8C1EFD82-CFE0-4D01-9231-2A1658B182A6@ajf.me>
	<CABBJUpfLCjWCgOUneN2O2M7qP2WBf8OgbVrdB-jm+Fn_dDJvVA@mail.gmail.com>
	<548FE4A8.4040909@beccati.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 08:58:30 +0100
Message-ID: <CAH-PCH7iY-WjbL4bKL3dNnrK91AzV3dOEs3FC5kAjD_5zZQBHg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Matteo Beccati <php@beccati.com>
Cc: Xinchen Hui <laruence@php.net>, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>, 
	PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d041c408e944adb050a50b97e
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] PHP 5.7
From: tyra3l@gmail.com (Ferenc Kovacs)

--f46d041c408e944adb050a50b97e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 8:52 AM, Matteo Beccati <php@beccati.com> wrote:
>
> On 16/12/2014 05:07, Xinchen Hui wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:
>>
>>> Good evening,
>>>
>>> There has been some debate about whether to make =E2=80=9CPHP 5.7". I h=
ave 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.
>>>
>>>  I am wondering why we need that?  no new features....
>>
>> I think we can extend 5.6 release cycle to avoid that..
>>
>
> I tend to agree with Xinchen here. A new minor release just to introduce =
a
> few deprecation messages? It sounds like a lot of work (it also need to b=
e
> maintained) for little gain.
>
> I think that doesn't also match the plans of other (accepted?) RFCs that
> were targeted for 5.7. I think I've seen it many times.
>
>
>
We already has one accepted RFC which targets 5.7, and as I mentioned
before 5.7.0 wouldn't be featureless, but would contain the small
self-contained features which are currently targeting 5.6.x.
So 5.7.0 would be a minor version without new major features, but also no
BC break, would allow us to make 5.6 more stable, and be a stepping stone
for 7.0 with the deprecated errors.

--=20
Ferenc Kov=C3=A1cs
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu

--f46d041c408e944adb050a50b97e--