I don't think it is possible to make everyone happy all the time. I think this should be kept for a user code fix.
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Ferenc Kovacs <tyr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 5:38 PM, Bishop Bettini <bis...@php.net> wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Ferenc Kovacs <tyr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Andreas Heigl <andr...@heigl.org> > wrote: > >> > >> > Am 05.11.15 um 14:14 schrieb Ferenc Kovacs: > >> > [...] > >> > > I would keep the old behavior for 5.6, even if that was unintended > >> nobody > >> > > complained about it(so removing it isn't a bugfix per se), so I see > no > >> > > reason to break userland code working before in a micro version. > >> > > for PHP-7.0 we can remove the old undocumented behavior but drop a > >> > mention > >> > > in NEWS/upgrading. > >> > > > >> > As it's already broken in the last 3 micro-versions I'm not sure > whether > >> > it makes things more complicated to "re-enable" it or not. > >> > > >> > Personally I'd say leave it as it is now (and try to prohibit such > >> > things in future). > >> > > >> 5.6 is not even halfway until EOL, so I think that argument of keeping > the > >> BC break because there are already 3 micro versions affected it is a bit > >> weak: > >> http://php.net/supported-versions.php > > > > > > Some are vendor-pinned and can't get the upgrade, so they have to fix > > their code anyway. Those who can upgrade would have to fix their code by > > 7.0, and IMO it seems better to fix it now while its on their mind. > > > > We're talking about a very small surface area of affected code, one that > > is easily changed with a sed. The damage of "breaking the behavior" is > > already done. Fixing user code or upgrading the engine is the only > > resolution. To me, fixing user code is the best solution: it's long term > > necessary, it's short term easy. If this were breaking documented code > (as > > happened with array_unique in 5.2.9), then I'd say fix the engine. But > it's > > not, it's breaking undocumented side-effected user code. That to me > sounds > > like a user code fix. > > > > and some will be pinned to the version before the BC break, some after the > possible fix, some will backport this fix anyways when their users > complain. > > -- > Ferenc Kovács > @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu >
