Re: What's our official stance on small self-contained additions in a micro version

Damn Gmail... I just top-posted. I'm going to go away for a while now... On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 4:19 PM Trevor Suarez <rican7@gmail.com> wrote: > Author of PR https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/1145 here. > > I'm really quite sorry. I didn't mean to create a mess here. I was just > trying to contribute. :/ > > Unfortunately, whether or not an RFC was necessary for an addition like > this wasn't very clear. I'm an internals noob, so I simply tried to follow > the flow of the addition of the similar method > DateTimeImmutable::createFromMutable() that was added, without > RFC > (correct me if I'm wrong), in 5.6.0: > ��r�$�8 > (]�http://php.net/manual/en/datetimeimmutable.createfrommutable.php > > Unfortunately, I'm not a huge fan of Derick's �g)u�初 > ��createFromMutable() > method (why isn't there just a createFromInstance() or > copy() method of > some sort), but I tried to best follow the current design with my proposal > and pull request. > > I think some clarification regarding what does or does-not require an RFC > would make it much more helpful to contributors that want to help build PHP. > > Again, sorry if I caused any issue here. > > - Trevor > > On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 4:09 PM Dennis Birkholz <dennis@birkholz.biz> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Am 01.04.2015 um 21:43 schrieb Stanislav Malyshev: >> >> That is right and I think that is the reality we have to face: most >> >> users use distro versions. They get a new version when they need to >> >> upgrade their distro every few years. >> > >> > I'm not sure where you got this statistics from, but as I said, it is >> > very easy to make .rpm or .deb with source version from php.net of the >> > same minor. I've seen it done many times. It's next to impossible to >> > make the same with different major, and nobody would do it for obvious >> > stability concerns. I think the approach of "you have to wait several >> > years for any tiny change" is terrible and detrimental for PHP >> > development, however easy it makes the life of folks in Debian, etc. >> >> I vaguely remembered the usage statistics that Anthony assembled in >> December and had other numbers in my head. (see >> >> http://blog.ircmaxell.com/2014/12/php-install-statistics.html) >> >> 5.5.12 (Ubuntu 14.10): 0.16% >> 5.5.9 (Ubuntu 14.04): 1.81% >> 5.4.16 (CentOS 7.0): 0.42% >> 5.4.4 (Debian Wheezy): 2.14% >> 5.3.10 (Ubuntu 12.04): 4.13% >> 5.3.3 (Debian Squeeze, Centos 6.6): 10.37% >> 5.3.2 (Ubuntu 10.04): 1.06% >> 5.1.6 (CentOS 5.11): 1.14% >> ============================== >> Debian, Ubuntu and CentOS: ~21,23% >> >> (I assume here like Anthony that the installs matching a distribution >> specific version always come from that distribution). >> >> So I have to step a little back from my previous statement, only about >> 1/5th of the installs seem to use distribution installs. But there are a >> lot of used versions in between. Why they don't upgrade I don't know, >> but if the upgrade would be a no-brainer without any risk for >> incompatibility, probably more would upgrade, but that is just >> speculation. >> >> >> No, I don't say ban non-security bugfixes. But I say don't add new >> >> methods/functionality that should go in the next feature release. >> > >> > I'm fine with adding only those that should go into the current one, >> > namely small self-contained additions :) Just as we agreed on long ago. >> >> An addition and a bug fix are different things. >> >> Greets >> Dennis >> >> -- >> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List >> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >> >>