On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Stephen Zarkos <[email protected]
> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ferenc Kovacs [mailto:[email protected]]
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Lester Caine <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I see that the vote currently has swung from yes to no for including
> > > in
> > > 5.6 but actually there is no option to include it even in PHP6? The
> > > improvement is required, needs proper planning because of the impact
> > > on many third parties, and should be planned now on the basis of a new
> > PHP6.
> > >
> > >
> > Nobody said that if rejected this can't be considered for PHP6.
> > On the contrary, many of the no voters explained that they would have
> > voted yes if the target version would have been 6.0.
>
> This is not directed at you guys in particular, but this is just the
> latest thread to mention PHP6 so I'll say it here. I know at least my team
> is frustrated every time "why not PHP6?" is mentioned in this thread.
>
> There is no PHP 6. If there was this RFC would have had two simple
> options; merge for PHP 6.0, merge for both 5.6 & 6.0. The justification
> for the latter option being that 5.6+ would provide a more reasonable
> upgrade path for 6. It may not be meant this way, but suggesting we merge
> this into PHP6 simply sounds disrespectful. There's no point in targeting
> some ethereal release, that's just a way of kicking this down the road so
> it can be ignored for a little longer. Without a plan forward to a
> release, even merging to Master is just another place for this to languish.
>
> And yes, I know there has been some (hopefully) serious discussion on PHP6
> recently, but that happens every year. Maybe it will happen this time?
> IMHO, if PHP 5 has slipped happily into middle age and cannot fathom such
> change anymore, then perhaps this community should create a roadmap to a
> new branch where more progressive development can be realized.
>
> Thanks,
> Steve
>
>
I'm glad that you agree with me on the urgent need of a major release on
the roadmap, otherwise changes which would be best to ship in a major
version will be either discarded, or worse forced into a minor version:
http://marc.info/?l=php-internals&m=138494774314060&w=4
Still, it feels a bit disrespectful to reply to my mails as if I would be
the one who tries to sabotage this change through putting it into "some
ethereal release".
ps: I still don't think that it is a good thing to start to turning this
into a "now or never" kind of decision.
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu