Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:89308
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain belski.net from 85.214.73.107 cause and error)
To: "'Rasmus Lerdorf'" <rasmus@lerdorf.com>,
	"'Anthony Ferrara'" <ircmaxell@gmail.com>,
	"'Zeev Suraski'" <zeev@zend.com>
Cc: <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <CAAyV7nG9E-7STWq2Hpe=y5Uf0nWzGMhka+FUX1p1FVNtYNVTJQ@mail.gmail.com> <112FFBCD-8445-40BC-B92F-3A97D3E97C4C@zend.com> <CAAyV7nE0bQba3Wr2yi8FbtDfDA=8ZSFz9dbQG5uZ+eF9bick2A@mail.gmail.com> <56523F74.9040708@lerdorf.com>
In-Reply-To: <56523F74.9040708@lerdorf.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 08:28:47 +0100
Message-ID: <06a601d125c0$99d5cfd0$cd816f70$@belski.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thread-Index: AQJo/XX6PyUhneI0//+AHkvzqVONNgIwPtO5AaY5k08Cwaxy851Eqx8w
Content-Language: en-us
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] INDRECT in arrays causes count() to become unpredictable
From: anatol.php@belski.net ("Anatol Belski")

Hi,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rasmus Lerdorf [mailto:rasmus@lerdorf.com]
> Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2015 11:20 PM
> To: Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com>; Zeev Suraski =
<zeev@zend.com>
> Cc: internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] INDRECT in arrays causes count() to become
> unpredictable
>=20
> On 11/22/2015 06:18 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote:
> > Zeev,
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 11:52 PM, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> =
wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 22 =D7=91=D7=A0=D7=95=D7=91=D7=B3 2015, at 0:47, Anthony =
Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I think this is significant enough to be a blocker to gold and =
that
> >>> we should fix it prior to release.
> >>>
> >>> Thoughts?
> >>>
> >>
> >> IMHO, unless we think fixing this would require breaking binary =
compatibility
> (which I don't think is the case) - this shouldn't block 7.0.0.  7.0.0 =
is a lot more
> about getting people to start paying attention to 7.0 and start =
testing their
> codebase against it - finding both the incompatibilities in their code =
and,
> undoubtedly - the bugs we failed to find.  I wish we could say this =
would be the
> last issue we find in 7.0, but I think we can all agree it's wishful =
thinking...
> >
> > Consider that Distros may very well pick whatever we call stable for
> > LTS releases. Meaning that non-critical (crash/security) bugs that =
we
> > miss may wind up living on for a VERY long time. If we don't intend =
.0
> > to be stable, then what's the point of versioning in the first =
place?
> >
> > Xinchen,
> >
> > Very interesting on the fix. I do think it's important for this to
> > land with 7, but at least we can have the discussion.
>=20
> I agree with Zeev here and I had a chat with Anatol about this =
tonight.
> This is a .0.0 release. Nobody is going to take a .0.0 and push it =
straight to
> production. And it is not going to part of any sort of LTS distro =
either. It's not like
> LTS distros don't pick up point releases.
> There is no way we will go 2 weeks without finding something for quite =
a while
> still which can drag things out indefinitely. The question is whether =
this is
> significant enough to postpone further. Personally I don't think it =
is. Let's get
> 7.0.0 out the door and get ourselves on track for regular point =
releases without
> any of this "perfect-release"
> stress.
>=20
From what I was merging for 7.0.0, I see that there are quite some =
primitive bug fixes, a couple of non critical 7.0 bugs and 2 bugs merged =
up from 5.6. The issue with the symtable counter stands at some point =
around the critical border. I personally would see it as not crossing =
that border.=20

So based on this, I'd rather go by releasing. The bug list after RC7 =
looks pretty much like a regular patch release, or even better. =
Comparing to RC6 where it was started to be tested obviously some more =
intensively, RC7 looks more like lost attention. We could go with more =
RC, sure. However in that case IMO we would catch bugs at very low speed =
with no guarantee we have a good thing at the end when we "think" it's =
good. This will cause us to defer things for much longer time. Releasing =
on 26th (or on 3rd with respect to Thanksgiving, if there are still =
strong concerns) were IMHO convenient for this reasons.

People that don't test RC won't start to test any later RC anyway. =
People that don't test RC will start to use  GA and that will lead to =
bug reports, in any case. So IMHO at this point we are good enough to do =
the first release with all the known bugs fixed, with the knowledge that =
no critical bugs are present, with the knowledge that community projects =
like Drupal 8, Symfony, etc. report the green tests, and with intention =
to get people waiting for GA involved.

Regards

Anatol=20