Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:80265 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 10360 invoked from network); 8 Jan 2015 05:42:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 8 Jan 2015 05:42:07 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=mailing@pascal-martin.fr; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=mailing@pascal-martin.fr; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain pascal-martin.fr designates 176.31.99.170 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: mailing@pascal-martin.fr X-Host-Fingerprint: 176.31.99.170 ks391579.kimsufi.com Received: from [176.31.99.170] ([176.31.99.170:53341] helo=pascal-martin.fr) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 89/30-05126-BA81EA45 for ; Thu, 08 Jan 2015 00:42:04 -0500 Received: from [192.168.0.3] (home.squalenet.net [82.225.233.238]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pascal-martin.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C477640B2F for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 06:37:58 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <54AE18A6.4070906@pascal-martin.fr> Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 06:41:58 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE][RFC] PHP 5.7 From: mailing@pascal-martin.fr ("Pascal Martin, AFUP") On 07/01/2015 01:44, Andrea Faulds wrote: > The voting widget and RFC can be found here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/php57 > Hi, We've discussed this RFC with other members of AFUP and while opinions have been expressed for both "yes" and "no", it seems we are at about 2/3 of "yes" -- which means we would be +1. Note, though, we are mostly a community of users (which means we generally have a point of view of "users") -- and there aren't many PHP contributors amongst us. Trying to summarize what we have said, on the +1 side : * PHP 5.x would be maintained (especially, it would receive security fixes) for one additional year, which would be a good thing for those who will not update to PHP 7 soon (and there are some -- still, not sure they would update to PHP 5.7 either) * Notices / deprecation warnings could help making the migration to PHP 7 easier (once you've migrated to the last 5.x minor version and fixed a few things, you'll know migrating to the next major should not be too hard) And, on the -1 side : * Even if there is no PHP 5.7, we already have something like 2 years left before PHP 5.6 stops getting security fixes -- and, taking a look at current versions usage, if one doesn't upgrade in 2 years, they probably won't upgrade in 3 years either. * Things that will break for PHP 7 will be indicated by the migration guide (and there are some automatic helper tools for some) * There are not that many PHP contributors -- which means having PHP 5.7 and PHP 7 more or less in parallel might slow PHP 7 down (not only for the initial release, but also for maintenance and evolutions later). -- Pascal MARTIN, AFUP - French UG http://php-internals.afup.org/