Re: Re: com php-src: Bug 49898 __getCookies() method implementation: ext/soap/soap.c ext/soap/tests/bug49898.phpt

On 19 June 2014 18:18, Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 6:33 PM, Peter Cowburn <petercowburn@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> /cc doc list >> >> >> On 19 June 2014 16:17, Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Ferenc Kovacs wrote (on 19/06/2014): >>> >>> Personally I think that 1 would be acceptable if we can keep these >>>> feature >>>> introductions as rare events, 2 would be a somewhat arbitrary >>>> restriction, >>>> and 3 could be confusing for the early adopters(slow adopters wouldn't >>>> really realize that the 5.6.X version missing feature Z was released >>>> after >>>> 5.5.Y which has the feature, so they wouldn't have expectations), >>>> >>> >>> Is there a convention in the manual for the situation where a function >>> is introduced in parallel in different branches? It can't say "PHP 5 >= >>> 5.5.15" if it's not also in 5.6.0. But if we were confident of it being in >>> 5.6.1, it could say "PHP 5.5 >= 5.5.15 < 5.6, >= 5.6.1" or something >>> less >>> messy than that, and anyone using 5.6 would know that it was coming to them >>> soon... >> >> >> There is no convention, nor I believe precedence, for this special case. >> >> Though, we have functions that were in different major branches: you'll >> see version information like "PHP 4 >= 4.1.0, PHP 5 >= 5.2.0". >> >> I think it would be a mistake to start using minor versions ("PHP 5.5 >= >> 5.5.15"). If we must do it, then perhaps something like "PHP 5 >= 5.5..15 >> and < 5.6.0" (there is precedent for using "and" like that). >> > > Yeah, but this SoapClient::__getCookies() was added to both 5.4 and > 5.5(5.4.30 and 5.5.14 respectively, none of those are released yet), so we > can't say "PHP 5 >= 5.5.14" and saying "PHP 5 >= 5.4.30" would > imply that > we have it in 5.5.0 which isn't the case. > The example was for only one branch. My suggestion, for this particular case, would be a version string like: PHP 5 >= 5.4.30 and < 5.5.0, PHP 5 >= 5.5.14 > > >> Then we could add on the 5.6 version info too, after a comma (we do >> this *very* regularly, for example when an ext is available in PHP and >> PECL). In the end, whichever way we do choose, it's still going to be >> messy! >> >> > > yeah, I can't really come up with anything simple and unambiguous. > This is why we don’t add new features in bug fix releases (or, shouldn’t). ;) > > -- > Ferenc Kovács > @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu >