Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:94060 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 85960 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2016 19:26:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 16 Jun 2016 19:26:59 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=php@fleshgrinder.com; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=php@fleshgrinder.com; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain fleshgrinder.com from 212.232.25.164 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: php@fleshgrinder.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 212.232.25.164 mx208.easyname.com Received: from [212.232.25.164] ([212.232.25.164:49830] helo=mx208.easyname.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 47/59-25388-28DF2675 for ; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 15:26:58 -0400 Received: from cable-81-173-134-219.netcologne.de ([81.173.134.219] helo=[192.168.178.20]) by mx.easyname.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bDcwI-0002hx-DL; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 19:26:54 +0000 Reply-To: internals@lists.php.net References: <6c03dafd-093a-0087-6312-96fede93c5f0@gmail.com> <1c437efe-7f1d-629f-cfbc-41cbcda38d89@fleshgrinder.com> <1a9958a1-a01b-d188-a2db-7b7d1b90198a@fleshgrinder.com> <580b2ca0-efab-79ce-4f2d-c2c942fff4b3@gmail.com> To: Stanislav Malyshev , internals@lists.php.net Message-ID: <232b7c4f-cf48-4a10-98d6-0c8d1b949707@fleshgrinder.com> Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 21:26:40 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <580b2ca0-efab-79ce-4f2d-c2c942fff4b3@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="pCrwUGvLiejMGHpOL8GBQE36bljg1xf5j" X-ACL-Warn: X-DNSBL-BARRACUDACENTRAL Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Is the "No BC Breaks in Minor Releases" policy enforceable? From: php@fleshgrinder.com (Fleshgrinder) --pCrwUGvLiejMGHpOL8GBQE36bljg1xf5j Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="3k83RXjP85Xnm7ockbHfgLMfSnc5HRAeH" From: Fleshgrinder Reply-To: internals@lists.php.net To: Stanislav Malyshev , internals@lists.php.net Message-ID: <232b7c4f-cf48-4a10-98d6-0c8d1b949707@fleshgrinder.com> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Is the "No BC Breaks in Minor Releases" policy enforceable? References: <6c03dafd-093a-0087-6312-96fede93c5f0@gmail.com> <1c437efe-7f1d-629f-cfbc-41cbcda38d89@fleshgrinder.com> <1a9958a1-a01b-d188-a2db-7b7d1b90198a@fleshgrinder.com> <580b2ca0-efab-79ce-4f2d-c2c942fff4b3@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <580b2ca0-efab-79ce-4f2d-c2c942fff4b3@gmail.com> --3k83RXjP85Xnm7ockbHfgLMfSnc5HRAeH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 6/16/2016 9:13 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > Hi! >=20 >> it into 7.0 is plain wrong and only creates problems. Everyone is alwa= ys >> so concerned about breaking something if someone proposes some >> deprecation but in such cases nobody cares. >=20 > Because it's not about how it's proposed, but is about what impact it > will have on users. If you try to deprecate feature that is widely used= , > you'd get a lot of pushback. If you try to change something that nobody= > is using and nobody should be using, you'd get little to no pushback. >=20 Hey! :) That does not match your usual argumentation which goes along the lines that people expect a stable language and that they will turn to other languages that are more stable if the language is not stable. We are making the language unstable. Deprecating things and offering better alternatives with a clear upgrade path is not breaking things, it is improving. We are improving something in this case but without prior notice and break stuff. Stuff we simply don't know of and cannot judge at all. I am still in favor if this change, fully and completely, as it is the right thing to do and it helps catching bugs. I am even in favor of adding more errors like this for other stuff like optional arguments before non-optional ones. However, we need to prepare our users for that (like with deprecations), inform them up front, and use the version numbers to communicate that things will be broken. Many people do not bother reading a CHANGELOG, following internals, or caring at all about the language development. Hence, the pushback always comes later but then it is too late. --=20 Richard "Fleshgrinder" Fussenegger --3k83RXjP85Xnm7ockbHfgLMfSnc5HRAeH-- --pCrwUGvLiejMGHpOL8GBQE36bljg1xf5j Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXYv11AAoJEOKkKcqFPVVrAEQP/3YvmV31H5yOxLuRu8QkWkS0 +0DBNBQz71KSczzE42v3Riq9/bYqT/yz6G7/V7rX1SjESvJBcnSMd9ybdSF7kTFj 6GbbIFCqADIv3kBisQS+3FnSZxpyYGrC00iuYkd8sSTXSWIY+zkWZTuP6Fzrksz1 xDPRunNaJOWC8fGJDhqqfUp4GjLhwDXTJyXohc2CPLGLqQCDdH0xs2pb4rjBOQpJ 7UI5R3fiH6bO+jIJOIWUIfiQK8Mr38rIcgyTuSeuXaoC5fa0/eDZAtKA0zNpVKvw PKe/xkkcudQPIun0Fc11jaXhx/boRPEQq/uOHBAUqU6b/A8BLItvr6WZCmy2dGKr NvP2SXGdsdaViJm4G3TYGZiwUnxsjghW0O2rV+FQVnOCmzTP32vZjfGr1Ip7mvoU FoY2WrQ+QsgkVSX4sZfoboBvHCrUGs2uJnWeto8rvELwfzvyqmh7Etrnsz23yJc3 quRGrLTKqhaEGTInAMD+fAx9InoDkrxr2Pi2ITaz3PBwH1owdXawbUQTzKfYGyx4 bSHxn3Z4WcsT+oJXXBwaENI+rKBmx+lECOcsBHH5Qqc5WSDetEy1LwpBFBwExGHR YXQBmbZQdMPMNYtul0p8Pwhielgi6iCb44Ssuvyk9Q5plUJdtyd/qjx4JHjCeqKV NXGPrf9W5zVTcunYNPCe =hWy3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pCrwUGvLiejMGHpOL8GBQE36bljg1xf5j--