Re: [PEPr] Comment on RFC::Requiring E_STRICT Compatibility for NewPEAR Packages

Hi, Alexey Borzov wrote: > Hi, > > Philippe Jausions wrote: > >> The RFC should state that new packages must provide a PHP5 E_STRICT >> version, but not restrict to that version only. > > I sincerely doubt that people would write two versions of packages but > if this ever happens... OK, I'll add this idea to the RFC. > I think it's important to not close the door completely on PHP4 packages. If we require that a PHP5 E_STRICT package be submitted first, we are actually boosting PHP5. Yes, I also think maintaining 2 versions can be a burden, but again you can't force millions of sites to switch to PHP5, just because PEAR decided to only accept PHP5 packages, and catering to that installed base is important if only from a PR point-of-view. The point is to still allow providing new packages to the huge installed base, while at the same time nudging active development towards PHP5. Now, I'm saying all this because 80% of my clients are still using PHP4 (whether I like it or not.) On the other end, external channels could be used for a PHP4 version of the packages, if we really forbid PHP4 packages afterall. BTW: yes, the good obvious name should be reserved for the PHP5 package, while the PHP4 version should be in bug-fixing mode. But if you really ask me, PHP5 E_STRICT is not even enough, I'll be much happier when PHP drops support for magic quotes and register globals altogether (among other things.) -Philippe