On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:25 PM, Dmitry Stogov <dmi...@zend.com> wrote:
> Hi Pierre, > > > On 06/16/2016 09:18 AM, Pierre Joye wrote: > >> >> Hi Dmitry >> >> I am sorry but I have to ask to wait before merging it. >> >> > Sorry, but this is already merged. > >> >> It is definitely not clear that: >> >> . The rfc was valid to begin with due to the short discussion time >> . This BC is acceptable for 7.x >> >> I think things like things can be prevented by following the relatively >> simple rfc process and having a more clear way to define what is acceptable >> as BC. >> >> > I think, the decision of the majority of voters, told that the BC break is > minor and acceptable for 7.1. > The only mistake was in shorten discussion period. > >> >> I think the RMs should step in here. >> >> > Yeah, I suppose, RMs may have a right to take a decision and revert this. > > Thanks. Dmitry. As I said in earlier discussions, the fact we cannot measure potential impact makes me very hesitant to include this change. Again: if I were the sole RM I _would_ try to veto this change. I understand the desire to get this out in 7.1, we will never have a time when 7.x has less users than it does now, and we don't want to wait for 8.0. IMO a better compromise would have been to add an E_DEPRECATED noting that it would be changed in 7.2, and then doing so. Is something like this still a possibility? I know that Joe feels strongly about this particular change being merged in, and it is done now. We should address similar situations moving forward, and move on. - Davey
