Re: Re: [PEPr] Comment on HTML::HTML_TagCloud

On Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 12:0446AM +0200, Pierre wrote: > On 15 Jun 2006 21:46:12 -0000 > mj@php.net ("Martin Jansen") wrote: > > Martin Jansen (http://pear.php.net/user/mj) has commented on the > > proposal for HTML::HTML_TagCloud. > > > > Any reason why this code still supports PHP 4? Everbody is in frenzy > > about E_STRICT compliance these days and yet we are still adding new > > packages that are far away from E_STRICT safety. > > Everybody or a few extremist using only php5.2-cvs as main version? :) I was referring to the threads that popped up on pear-dev about this in the past months. Among others, there was this one: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=pear-dev&m=114860418402237&w=2 Search the archives if you don't remember. > I'm not saying that we should not worry about that, but php4 is (still) > 90%+ of the "market" and I do not see what is not E_STRICT in this > package (by quicly reading it). > > Or do you mean the lack of public/private declaration? Yes, I was referring to the syntax. This is why the package is not E_STRICT compliant at all. > If yes, I see no > point to make a package no php4 compatible only for some syntax sugar :) I do. I know that this is controversial and that I will tick people of, but if we ever want to make any progress with regards to helping PHP 5 gain ground, we should stop adding new PHP 4 packages. I don't understand why PEAR people still support PHP 4 despite the fact that our "mothership" has released PHP 5.0.0 nearly two years ago. Let's give people a reason to get their asses up and upgrade to PHP 5. It's about time. - Martin