Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:79756
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 209.85.212.171 as permitted sender)
References: <8C1EFD82-CFE0-4D01-9231-2A1658B182A6@ajf.me> <CABBJUpfLCjWCgOUneN2O2M7qP2WBf8OgbVrdB-jm+Fn_dDJvVA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFMT4NrGBi-YpYz_pOgg=BBhymp5Y4Re9XOwnnY47BTiXA5Oxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <b110fda6282aaf482e7906fcccdb00ab@mail.gmail.com> <CAH-PCH5SGuk1L+9y4FBYmdC8GP05UOFnw+iupTy+Av65AGJCnw@mail.gmail.com>
 <c4c3b84eb3b5c5e2451ee3c585fd95c2@mail.gmail.com> <EA391654-F731-4B45-9E45-EE780183EEE4@gmail.com>
 <CABRjmp__TD6PjNTiETgD-jSmLSE4cuj7AoOzQh+zmnp6XN5G=Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMUwpuQV1ChBM2KhNix8gKZFOTrooaZx7sqzamcnbVxf=g-RJQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <f30e79c9670457f0aa6c6e53845017ff@mail.gmail.com> <CADajX4Da_r+37N7qQXL22TH4RQVs390C3Z1+o+dgy0OxKNRjzA@mail.gmail.com>
 <d1681262d0c30004c524c415aa2b1fb5@mail.gmail.com> <CADajX4BXZKpZvWddMFZbYfgxzHbAq3+5QfgxyXEToB-KOFONUw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADajX4BXZKpZvWddMFZbYfgxzHbAq3+5QfgxyXEToB-KOFONUw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Thread-Index: AQHEAwp930Oucd9RrwDs9oQRz4U5JAKjqEmtAMffvUwBqetzRgLNlk2CAW8qVj4CM2w/iQOd6aJpAlYrjDcBt9VNnAGYQ2jcAhAcz7ICDt6LLpvjuZoA
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 01:07:00 +0200
Message-ID: <f212393fc4367bf75d3d1d05aaeef886@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adam Harvey <aharvey@php.net>
Cc: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] PHP 5.7
From: zeev@zend.com (Zeev Suraski)

> From: adam@adamharvey.name [mailto:adam@adamharvey.name] On
> Behalf Of Adam Harvey
> Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 12:29 AM
> To: Zeev Suraski
> Cc: PHP Internals
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] PHP 5.7
>
> I think it's actually more likely that people will upgrade to a new minor
> than a
> later revision that includes deprecation warnings in the long run. There's
> a
> decent amount of evidence that suggests that users tend to stick to their
> distro packages for minors, and those tend to be early in the minor cycle
> (the
> various version links at http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/pl-
> php/5/all are interesting, and I've seen non-public data that indicates
> the
> same thing).

Both my experience and interpretation of the numbers is quite different.
Companies consider migration to new minor versions as a relatively painful
one, that requires a full cycle of QA and expect changes to be made.  Even
though that's been less and less true in recent years, that's still
perception.  That's why penetration of ALL newer versions of PHP combined is
still less of that of 5.3, and why despite the fact migration from 5.4 to
5.5 or 5.6 is quite painless, there are a lot more people on 5.4 than there
are on 5.5/5.6 (and not on any one distro version as far as I can tell, just
the most recent ones).  Even on 5.5, the distro version (5.5.9) accounts for
30%, while other versions account for 70% - with the most recent ones
(5.5.16 through 5.5.19) accounting for 42% combined - that's almost 8 times
5.6's entire footprint (you can see similar breakdowns for 5.3 as well - 22%
for the distro version vs. 46% for the most recent 5.3 versions).  Companies
(and users) are simply a lot less wary of 3rd digit upgrades than 2nd digit
ones.

> For twelve months, until 5.6 enters extended support. I think that's
> manageable, and although it might seem silly internally, I think it's also
> a
> better result for our users in terms of managing their migration paths.

I think it looks silly externally, I don't think we should care much about
internal silliness.

Zeev