Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Deprecate dynamic properties

This is only part of a thread. view whole thread
  116391
November 15, 2021 20:39 internals@lists.php.net ("Björn Larsson via internals")
Den 2021-11-15 kl. 10:52, skrev Derick Rethans:
> Dear Internals, > > On Wed, 10 Nov 2021, Nikita Popov wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 12:02 PM Nikita Popov ppv@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> This RFC takes the more direct route of deprecating this >>> functionality entirely. I expect that this will have relatively >>> little impact on modern code (e.g. in Symfony I could fix the vast >>> majority of deprecation warnings with a three-line diff), but may >>> have a big impact on legacy code that doesn't declare properties at >>> all. >>> >> >> I plan to open voting on this RFC soon. Most of the feedback was >> positive, apart from the initial choice of opt-int mechanism, and that >> part should be addressed by the switch to the >> #[AllowDynamicProperties] attribute. > > The voting is now open, but I think one thing was not taken into account > here, the many small changes that push work to maintainers of Open > Source library and CI related tools. > > In the last few years, the release cadence of PHP has increased, which > is great for new features. It however has not been helpful to introduce > many small deprecations and BC breaks in every single release. > > This invariably is making maintainers of Open Source anxious, and > frustrated as so much work is need to keep things up to date. I know > they are *deprecations*, and applications can turn these off, but that's > not the case for maintainers of libraries. > > Before we introduce many more of this into PHP 8.2, I think it would be > wise to figure out a way how to: > > - improve the langauge with new features > - keep maintenance cost for open source library and CI tools much lower > - come up with a set of guidelines for when it is necessary to introduce > BC breaks and deprecations. > > I am all for improving the language and making it more feature rich, but > we have not spend enough time considering the impacts to the full > ecosystem. > > I have therefore voted "no" on this RFC, and I hope you will too. > > cheers, > Derick > Hi,
Maybe the RM's should have a mandate to keep track on deprecations for a specific release and be able to say: "Sorry the shop are closed for further deprecations in this release". What do you think? One could count the deprecations in the 8.x track and have a straw poll on it and/or ask what key deprecations do we see further for the 8.x? Is even the "Dynamic properties" one, one of the last ones? r//Björn L