# Offical stance wrt. bug reports for unmaintained PECL exts - Thread: https://externals.io/message/85701 - Original archive: https://news-web.php.net/php.internals/85701 - Started by Christoph Becker on 2015-04-02T23:59:53+00:00 - Messages: 3 - Reply by email to internals@lists.php.net - More for agents: search with https://externals.io/search.md?q={query} · JSON API at https://externals.io/api · documentation at https://externals.io/llms.txt --- ## #85701 — Christoph Becker — 2015-04-02T23:59:53+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85701#85701 Hi everybody! It seems there are a lot of (old) bug reports for unmaintained PECL extensions. I wonder what the official stance is on that. For instance, there is #57551[1], which has been "suspended" by Joe Watkins recently. I'm not too happy with "suspending" those bug reports, because they're lying around without a realistic chance of getting fixed, and come up from time to time when looking for a "random bug". Then there is #58612[2] which is about an extension that had its only release in 2003, and its latest commits 5 years ago (apparently, some standard commits for several PECL packages). Wouldn't it make sense to close such bug reports ("Sorry, but you're using an unmaintained extension ..."?). Thoughts? [1] [2] -- Christoph M. Becker --- ## #85704 — Maciej Sobaczewski — 2015-04-03T05:02:52+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85701#85704 · In reply to: #85701 W dniu 2015-04-03 o 01:59, Christoph Becker pisze: > Hi everybody! > > It seems there are a lot of (old) bug reports for unmaintained PECL > extensions. I wonder what the official stance is on that. > > For instance, there is #57551[1], which has been "suspended" by Joe > Watkins recently. I'm not too happy with "suspending" those bug > reports, because they're lying around without a realistic chance of > getting fixed, and come up from time to time when looking for a "random > bug". If we'd like to deal with those reports, "Won't be fixed" seems more suitable (similiarly to "PHP 4 support discontinued" on https://bugs.php.net/quick-fix-desc.php). Marking those bugs as suspended looks like a good idea to me. They are not cluttering open bugs anymore and they can be easily excluded from "random bug" functionallity. > Then there is #58612[2] which is about an extension that had its only > release in 2003, and its latest commits 5 years ago (apparently, some > standard commits for several PECL packages). Wouldn't it make sense to > close such bug reports ("Sorry, but you're using an unmaintained > extension ..."?). > > Thoughts? > > [1] > [2] > Cheers, Maciej. --- ## #85709 — Ferenc Kovacs — 2015-04-03T08:53:20+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85701#85709 · In reply to: #85701 > Hi everybody! > > It seems there are a lot of (old) bug reports for unmaintained PECL > extensions. I wonder what the official stance is on that. > > For instance, there is #57551[1], which has been "suspended" by Joe > Watkins recently. I'm not too happy with "suspending" those bug > reports, because they're lying around without a realistic chance of > getting fixed, and come up from time to time when looking for a "random > bug". > > Then there is #58612[2] which is about an extension that had its only > release in 2003, and its latest commits 5 years ago (apparently, some > standard commits for several PECL packages). Wouldn't it make sense to > close such bug reports ("Sorry, but you're using an unmaintained > extension ..."?). > > Thoughts? > > [1] > [2] > > -- > Christoph M. Becker > > -- > > > > on a related note: I've marked both packages as unmaintained on pecl.php.net . -- Ferenc Kovács @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu