Re: Re: Naming changes.

Is there any special reason so many people want to move to 4.1 just like that? :) A miniversion is fine for this type of change. We're fine at 4.0. So far, changes in the major version number were due to serious architecture changes. Changes in the minor version number were planned (for 3.1) but never actually executed, and they also involved architecture changes, but not major ones. Mostly everything else falls in the miniversion (3rd digit) category, we'll have dozens of those in the future. Zeev At 17:18 28/12/2000, Sterling Hughes wrote:

Although we could leave the functions in there for ever it just seems silly to me as we will get more and more old functions lying about and its probably much better in the long run to have an efficient way of killing of legacy function names. And there are lots of them, I have made a list of about 1/2 of them so far and will continue and finish it if people think that this is the right thing (tm) to do. I'd say go for it! What we do once we have the list I don't know, I'd suggest for now making a clean break in the form of 4.1 or some equivalent version number, where function naming is corrected and the readline extension is removed. -sterling -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, e-mail: php-dev-unsubscribe@lists.php.net For additional commands, e-mail: php-dev-help@lists.php.net To contact the list administrators, e-mail: php-list-admin@lists.php.net

-- Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> CTO & co-founder, Zend Technologies Ltd. http://www.zend.com/