Re: [RFC] [Discussion] Deprecate functions with overloaded signatures

> On 15 May 2023, at 19:51, Rowan Tommins <rowan.collins@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 15 May 2023 19:38:56 BST, Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com> wrote: > >> I agree entirely. Setting reasonable expectations for users to plan around, such as a >> known 5-years-per-major cycle, helps end users far more than "whelp, we did something big, >> version number time!" > >> Tangent: If I were to put together an RFC that set out such a 5 year cycle expectation with >> reasonable guidelines around when things could be deprecated, would anyone actually support it? > > A big yes from me, but I've not had the most promising responses when banging that drum in > the past. > Hi, As an end user this would be very useful and address a lot of queries when planning and budgeting for PHP developments, especially if major breaking changes were also in .0 versions as I saw suggested elsewhere in a recent thread (also from Larry I think). I've been spending a lot of time reading around and thinking after the "Future Stability of PHP Thread" last month and think that this level of predictability would do a lot to mitigate issues (though appreciate it would have other consequences). Best wishes, Matt