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

Joshua Eichorn wrote: > Alexey Borzov wrote: > >> We've gained couple hundred packages that are forward-compatible, i.e. >> will not break spectacularly when E_STRICT is promoted to E_ERROR. >> > Well except for i'm sure the PHP devs will break lots of other things > before even php6 is out and if we release new versions of every package > as soon as possible will quickly be up too MDB7 etc. Agreed, aiming for E_STRICT compliance is a bit like shooting a moving target. E_STRICT is to check if your code will break with FUTURE versions of PHP. So what is E_STRICT today, will not necessarly be E_STRICT tomorrow. The PHP devs seem to pull the carpet from right under your feet pretty often. So the E_STRICT criteria should be tied to which versions of PHP the package is supposed to work with. Hopefully the code will easily be cleaned up to match E_STRICT criteria, but maybe PEAR should define what E_STRICT means to PEAR. Otherwise it will be impossible to agree on whether a package is actually E_STRICT. Plus throw in the PEAR backward compatibility rule, and we're in for some headaches. Cheers, -Philippe