Hi again
Trying to drive home this message I am starting a new thread.
Mini-summary: The next major edition of PHP must be 7, not 6.
Summary:
A. There seem to be universal agreement that the up until last week
branch of PHP called trunk was going to be PHP 6 is a dead end and not
the way into the future. (I'll call this "PHP 6.old" from now on.
B. Instead a more incremental approach is better, according to the
consensus. (I'll call this "PHP.next".)
C. BUT: There is a ton of articles and slides and blog posts describing
PHP 6.old on the net already.
D. If there will be a new major edition of PHP with the version number
6, not based on "PHP 6.old" but "PHP.next" it will take a huge amount of
time for the old resources to disappear from Google search results and
peoples minds.
E (for ergo): The next major version of PHP must be called 7, to avoid
confusion. Could we not at least agree on this?
This is not a technical decision. It is a pedagogic decision.
It is not a decision about if we are going from 5.3 to 7 directly or if
there should be a 5.4 release in between. Nor is it a decision about
timetable or features.
(And it is an appropriate slap to publishers who have put out books with
PHP 6 in their title, just for marketing purposes.)
OK?
You may stop reading now because I've made my point. Here comes a little
fairy tale illustrating it further.
A fairy tale from real life.
Once upon a time there was a proposal for ECMAScript 4. Then along came
Douglas Crockford and said "this is bad". Then Microsoft said "we concur".
And Mozilla and Adobe said: "You are letting us down. You had promised
to support ECMAScript 4 and you have a hidden agenda."
And there was some name calling.
And people were pissed.
But then they talked to each other, and reached an agreement. There
should be ES 3.1 first and ES 4 later.
But they interpreted the agreement differently. Which made people pissed
again.
And work continued on the two branches, which were now incompatible with
each other.
But then they talked to each other again, and reached an agreement - again.
And - poff - ECMAScript 4 was gone.
And ECMAScript 3.1 became "fifth edition", because changes were to large
for a point release.
And the future became "Harmony", which might become 6th edition, once
it's done.
And everybody is happy :-)
To make my point absolutely clear, this is the analogy:
ES 4 = PHP 6.old
ES 3.1 = PHP 5.4
ES 5 = PHP 7
And for those who have missed it, here is the story retold by Brendan Eich:
http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/theater/video.php?v=eich-yuiconf2009-harmony
And retold by Doug C:
http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/theater/video.php?v=crockford-yuiconf2009-state
--
Keryx Web (Lars Gunther)
http://keryx.se/
http://twitter.com/itpastorn/
http://itpastorn.blogspot.com/
Hi again
Trying to drive home this message I am starting a new thread.
Mini-summary: The next major edition of PHP must be 7, not 6.
Summary:
A. There seem to be universal agreement that the up until last week
branch of PHP called trunk was going to be PHP 6 is a dead end and not
the way into the future. (I'll call this "PHP 6.old" from now on.B. Instead a more incremental approach is better, according to the
consensus. (I'll call this "PHP.next".)C. BUT: There is a ton of articles and slides and blog posts describing
PHP 6.old on the net already.D. If there will be a new major edition of PHP with the version number
6, not based on "PHP 6.old" but "PHP.next" it will take a huge amount of
time for the old resources to disappear from Google search results and
peoples minds.E (for ergo): The next major version of PHP must be called 7, to avoid
confusion. Could we not at least agree on this?This is not a technical decision. It is a pedagogic decision.
It is not a decision about if we are going from 5.3 to 7 directly or if
there should be a 5.4 release in between. Nor is it a decision about
timetable or features.(And it is an appropriate slap to publishers who have put out books with
PHP 6 in their title, just for marketing purposes.)OK?
No, not ok. We will call the next release whatever we like. People who
have written books or articles about PHP 6 inferring they knew what the
final state of PHP 6 would be were misguided. We never got to the point
of a final feature set much less a release date.
-Rasmus
No, not ok. We will call the next release whatever we like. People who
have written books or articles about PHP 6 inferring they knew what the
final state of PHP 6 would be were misguided. We never got to the point
of a final feature set much less a release date.
+1
I occasionally teach PHP courses and mention up & coming features,
but always with the caveat: nothing is set in stone until it hits the streets.
--
Alain Williams
Linux/GNU Consultant - Mail systems, Web sites, Networking, Programmer, IT Lecturer.
+44 (0) 787 668 0256 http://www.phcomp.co.uk/
Parliament Hill Computers Ltd. Registration Information: http://www.phcomp.co.uk/contact.php
Past chairman of UKUUG: http://www.ukuug.org/
#include <std_disclaimer.h
2010-03-13 19:50, Alain Williams skrev:
I occasionally teach PHP courses and mention up& coming features,
but always with the caveat: nothing is set in stone until it hits the streets.
Your students are not the problem. Nor are mine. But just because there
exist educators who know their job and students that carefully listen to
them does not mean that there also are students who are taught by less
knowledgeable tutors or people who are (being) self taught.
A ton of information might fix the problem at hand, but if going
straight to version 7 reduces that need to a few kilograms, why not
chose the easier path?
--
Keryx Web (Lars Gunther)
http://keryx.se/
http://twitter.com/itpastorn/
http://itpastorn.blogspot.com/
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
No, not ok. We will call the next release whatever we like. People who
have written books or articles about PHP 6 inferring they knew what the
final state of PHP 6 would be were misguided. We never got to the point
of a final feature set much less a release date.
+1
Authors that wrote, publishers that published and readers that bought
books on PHP 6 need to be ... punished ;-)
--
Sebastian Bergmann Co-Founder and Principal Consultant
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
No, not ok. We will call the next release whatever we like. People who
have written books or articles about PHP 6 inferring they knew what the
final state of PHP 6 would be were misguided. We never got to the point
of a final feature set much less a release date.+1
Authors that wrote, publishers that published and readers that bought
books on PHP 6 need to be ... punished ;-)
Is that wise and well-considered or something the community might regret in the long run?
Best regards
Stefan
Stefan Marr wrote:
Is that wise and well-considered or something the community might
regret in the long run?
The books in question have not been written by community members
(because those know better). I think there are so many PHP 6 books on
the market because greedy publishers want to release old content under
a new title and use a version bump (that has not happened yet) to cover
up this fact.
--
Sebastian Bergmann Co-Founder and Principal Consultant
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/
Hey Sebastian—
Stefan Marr wrote:
Is that wise and well-considered or something the community might
regret in the long run?The books in question have not been written by community members
(because those know better). I think there are so many PHP 6 books on
the market because greedy publishers want to release old content under
a new title and use a version bump (that has not happened yet) to cover
up this fact.
Well said! In all fairness, though, this doesn't change the fact that the books exist—and that their keyword trolling is eventually going to hurt those who look for information on PHP 6, if that's what the final product is going to be called.
But, really, who cares about a name while there isn't even a spec? The name should be the last thing that needs to be considered—literally, so that the trolls don't have an opportunity to flood the market with opportunistic titles until the new version is well defined and ready to go. Calling it “trunk” at this point ought to be more than enough, IMO.
—Mt.
Stefan Marr wrote:
Is that wise and well-considered or something the community might
regret in the long run?The books in question have not been written by community members
(because those know better). I think there are so many PHP 6 books on
the market because greedy publishers want to release old content under
a new title and use a version bump (that has not happened yet) to cover
up this fact.
Even if that is the fact, first, I disagree with your definition of community, and second, how does a PHP beginner know about that? These are the people which will be confused.
Anyway, that is a political discussion, and I share the concerns raised in this thread.
What ever the decision on that matter will be, it should be properly documented together with the goals for 'The Next Big Thing'.
And, well, I think, a proper RFC would be the way to go, to document the goals/roadmap and have to have a base for discussion.
Best regards
Stefan
--
Sebastian Bergmann Co-Founder and Principal Consultant
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/--
--
Stefan Marr
Software Languages Lab
Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Pleinlaan 2 / B-1050 Brussels / Belgium
http://soft.vub.ac.be/~smarr
Phone: +32 2 629 2974
Fax: +32 2 629 3525
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
No, not ok. We will call the next release whatever we like. People who
have written books or articles about PHP 6 inferring they knew what the
final state of PHP 6 would be were misguided. We never got to the point
of a final feature set much less a release date.+1
Authors that wrote, publishers that published and readers that bought
books on PHP 6 need to be ... punished ;-)
Is that wise and well-considered or something the community might regret in the long run?
Nobody needs to be punished and I think Rasmus stayed clear of such words for a reason. The name of the next version is not really all that relevant more if the next version will be a minor bump (aka x.y+1) or a major (aka x+1.y).
regards,
Lukas Kahwe Smith
mls@pooteeweet.org
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
Nobody needs to be punished
My choice of words was bad, sorry.
--
Sebastian Bergmann Co-Founder and Principal Consultant
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
No, not ok. We will call the next release whatever we like. People who
have written books or articles about PHP 6 inferring they knew what the
final state of PHP 6 would be were misguided. We never got to the point
of a final feature set much less a release date.+1
Authors that wrote, publishers that published and readers that bought
books on PHP 6 need to be ... punished ;-)
Is that wise and well-considered or something the community might regret in the long run?Nobody needs to be punished and I think Rasmus stayed clear of such words for a reason. The name of the next version is not really all that relevant more if the next version will be a minor bump (aka x.y+1) or a major (aka x+1.y).
The PHP manual refers to "PHP 6" over 200 times, and there are probably a few people who've written code that takes this information into account. I'm not saying the proposal in this thread is a solution or needed, but there is a valid concern here.
The PHP manual will be updated once this is figured out, with extra care ensuring unicode and PHP 6 information is current. All suggestions for how to handle this today are welcome.
Regards,
Philip
2010-03-13 19:33, Rasmus Lerdorf skrev:
No, not ok. We will call the next release whatever we like. People who
have written books or articles about PHP 6 inferring they knew what the
final state of PHP 6 would be were misguided. We never got to the point
of a final feature set much less a release date.
I think I made it clear I have no sympathy for the people responsible
for those books.
However, I have lots of sympathy for the readers of those books!
And the readers of the PHP manual.
And the readers of Andrei's slides and of various articles on the net.
And I have lots of sympathy for everyone who will see such resources
show up when they google for a solution to a problem.
Maybe my words sounded a bit critical and unappreciative. That was not
my intention. I have tons of respect for all of you who make PHP such a
wonderful language to use and teach.
I am not qualified to suggest specifics about the technical route
forward and have therefore carefully avoided anything that looks like
casting a vote about "5.4".
If, however, skipping version 6 will lead to less confusion and reduce
the amount of education needed about the changes in the language, why
not chose the easier path?
Or to put this differently: Of course the core contributors are at
liberty to call the next major version 6, but I think there is wisdom in
going straight to 7.
--
Keryx Web (Lars Gunther)
http://keryx.se/
http://twitter.com/itpastorn/
http://itpastorn.blogspot.com/
No, not ok. We will call the next release whatever we like. People who
have written books or articles about PHP 6 inferring they knew what the
final state of PHP 6 would be were misguided. We never got to the point
of a final feature set much less a release date.
+1
There is going to be plenty of time (IMHO) between now and when PHP6
could be ready to start re-educating people so that it becomes less of
a problem. As for people who bought books on PHP6 well they should go
back to the publisher and ask for a refund.
If people have been writing code to be PHP6 ready then more fool them,
since its madness to try and write for a version of software which is
in constant flux. Anyone that I have discussed this with over the last
year have pretty much universally written code for PHP 5.3 in the hope
that the migration to PHP6 would be made more simple.
Marco
Hi!
E (for ergo): The next major version of PHP must be called 7, to avoid
confusion. Could we not at least agree on this?
Why should we care? When we have that version working, we could have
long, nice and pleasant flame^H^H^H^H^Hdiscussion about it. Right now
this is one question that we absolutely shouldn't bother with.
Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect
stas@zend.com http://www.zend.com/
(408)253-8829 MSN: stas@zend.com
Keryx Web wrote:
Summary:
A. There seem to be universal agreement that the up until last week
branch of PHP called trunk was going to be PHP 6 is a dead end and not
the way into the future. (I'll call this "PHP 6.old" from now on.
is this the case?
2010-03-14 23:27, rich gray skrev:
is this the case?
I have not seen anyone speak up and say anything else.
Of course that does not mean that every single line of code will be
scrapped or that every idea has been abandoned. But it seems to me there
is universal agreement about scrapping it as a whole.
--
Keryx Web (Lars Gunther)
http://keryx.se/
http://twitter.com/itpastorn/
http://itpastorn.blogspot.com/