Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90973
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.160.171 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: yohgaki@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <01c101d158d9$a0533450$e0f99cf0$@belski.net>
References: <03a501d15439$fcbf9ca0$f63ed5e0$@php.net> <56A1054A.5080102@fedoraproject.org>
 <CAGa2bXaKaoiSKLpodHAEKurSEwrs9rYO25uwqGdbwg_KKUkGbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <56A2069B.2050007@fedoraproject.org> <56A21D68.6030403@fedoraproject.org>
 <56A825A9.9020706@gmail.com> <CAGa2bXYf9JFtH_yqjYfL7UiqDCzxmeFy9s-Ja4YPF+UjxDs3=w@mail.gmail.com>
 <56A85967.4090603@gmail.com> <CAGa2bXb_3eM2EaM=Zt2Mf-pLnGDvgek2M87O_7mL5f6HLp3s2w@mail.gmail.com>
 <01c101d158d9$a0533450$e0f99cf0$@belski.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 17:19:24 +0900
Message-ID: <CAGa2bXaEtd_j9yZG8H_Eyc7LX=Z1k_kV6P2C-vsNRt_9=Mv2mA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anatol Belski <anatol.php@belski.net>
Cc: Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>, Remi Collet <remi@fedoraproject.org>, 
	"internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>, Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 7.0.3 RC1 is available for testing - **** BC break ***
From: yohgaki@ohgaki.net (Yasuo Ohgaki)

Hi Anatol,

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Anatol Belski <anatol.php@belski.net> wrot=
e:
> Thanks for all the investigation (as well Remi, Stas and everyone). At fi=
rst glance last week, as for me, it looked like OK to keep at least the 7.0=
 part, as the breach was only concerning the unit tests but unlikely the ac=
tual web functionality. While it is good to have improvements and hardening=
 on the unclean behaviors, the area is critical and should be kept stable i=
n stable branches. Right now, it seems that the patch can have unexposed im=
pacts.
>
> I would like also to remind that we're now quite short in time as finals =
are planned for the next week. With this in mind, IMHO it's better to play =
safe and revert 5.6 and 7.0 to the previous state before this change. Or at=
 least, don't release these patches in the upcoming finals, but keep improv=
ing and fixing BC breaches in dev branch and re-evaluate the status in the =
next possible RC.

Reported unit test failures were test code is finding bug fix logic
changes. There are missing "if" for transid, but other than this,
these changes are valid and correct.

However, as a user stand point view, it's frustrating unit tests fails
on new minor version, even if it is due to proper fixes.

I agree to postpone the fix to next minor version up. Shall I revert
my patches now?

Regards,

--
Yasuo Ohgaki
yohgaki@ohgaki.net