On 6 February 2026 23:58:17 GMT, Juliette Reinders Folmer 
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On 5-2-2026 17:00, Larry Garfield wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 4, 2026, at 11:09 AM, Volker Dusch wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 4, 2026 at 3:41 PM Larry Garfield <[email protected]> 
>>> wrote:
>>>> Where as I would, because we catch flack every version for how many 
>>>> "small" BC breaks we have.  It hinders people's ability to upgrade and 
>>>> generates bad PR for PHP routinely.
>>>> 
>>>> Majors exist for a reason.
>>>> 
>>> That claim is completely unsubstantiated, doesn't reflect my
>>> experienced and researched reality, and feels quite off-topic, given
>>> PHP very much allows for this.
>> Ask Juliette or MWOP how much the "minor" BC breaks cause them issues.
>My ears were burning. And yes, "minor" BC breaks can definitely be hugely 
>problematic, however, the "BC-break" proposed in this RFC - to me - is not one 
>in that category. Feels more like a bug-fix.

This is what I've been thinking all along, this is a bug fix.

I wasn't quite sure whether this was considered as anything else, and think a 
lot of time was wasted in this process. Process can be good when it is 
appropriate, but that line wasn't reached for this bug fix in my opinion. 

cheers
Derick

Reply via email to