Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:85550
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.216.174 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <55193060.5000804@php.net>
References: <CAH-PCH74+2-S2ySME1X5QW5rA9Jb5=1T+hJ3t1sxHiaTO31RJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<55193060.5000804@php.net>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 18:36:08 +0700
Message-ID: <CAEZPtU5ms0k6wNyM7nN6uCDo6KsmXjGa1YQTqgRbMRdq3FRF1w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael Wallner <mike@php.net>
Cc: Julien Pauli <jpauli@php.net>, Stanislav Malyshev <stas@php.net>, Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com>, 
	PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c006b05d552605127fe350
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] What's our official stance on small self-contained
 additions in a micro version
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye)

--001a11c006b05d552605127fe350
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Mar 30, 2015 6:15 PM, "Michael Wallner" <mike@php.net> wrote:
>
> On 30/03/15 12:04, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I know that our official release process allows that, but there are some
> > reasonable arguments against doing that and this topic was brought up
> > multiple times related to specific fixes.
> > I have two open PRs like that:
> > https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/1204
> > https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/969
> > and of course there are a bunch of similar ones from other people, and
> > there are cases when somebody simply pushes a change like that, other
times
> > somebody points out that it should require an RFC(
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/json_preserve_fractional_part for example), but
> > most of the times we simply don't know what to do, and eventually we
just
> > let the PR/patch to rot and die.
> > I would like to know if we can come up with a rule which can have
consensus
> > behind it, and maybe formalize it as an extension to our current
> > releaseprocess rfc.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
>
> How about:
>
> It's okay, if it does not need `version_compare(PHP_VERSION)` but can be
> tested by e.g. `defined("SOME_CONSTANT")` or `function_exists("fn")`?

We have php version constants, major, minor and patch.

To me it all looks the same, ugly #ifdef like. Now that we release a x.y+1
every year, I do not see the point to continue to force our users to
clutter their codes with such tests.

> --
> Regards,
> Mike
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>

--001a11c006b05d552605127fe350--