Bumping the version requirement is a fine thing to do, but trying to morph phpBB3 into some "maintainable" structure is just a bad idea, and without utilizing the features of 5.3 the requirements bump is silly. I'd counterpropose my suggestion, now at least a year old, to ditch 3.x and just do phpBB4 since there's actually some enthusiasm around that idea.
Use third party libraries such as Symfony2 components, Doctrine2 DBAL, Assetic to replace parts of our legacy code base
I can't think of any good reason to do this.
Use Symfony2 EventDispatcher instead of copy-paste maintaining the code base (see this PR
I'm not sure I follow the logical path in this bullet.
All MODs can potentially benefit from the same
All MODs can already benefit from features in newer versions of PHP by simply declaring their version requirement.
- We gradually add more use of PHP 5.3 features in minor releases
- Possibly get more collaboration and help to fix our dated code base
Skeptical of either one of these ever happening.
Adopt standard PSR-0 autoloading in the future
Right now phpBB4 is not really happening. The way I see it, this move may allow us to do what drupal is doing right now. Slowly adopting third party components and making their code base maintainable.
phpBB4 isn't happening because phpBB can't get a minor feature release out the door. Arbitrarily replacing code that works well and wasn't going to be changed anyway with a Symfony component (DBAL) is going to chew hundreds of man-hours that could be spent on the features
in a feature release
igorw wrote:I was hoping I wouldn't have to argue about that point, but I guess I was optimistic.
The hosts don't upgrade because the apps run on low versions. The PHP projects don't upgrade because the hosts don't support new PHP versions. We cannot wait for them forever. There are enough 5.3 hosts to migrate to. The irony of the situation is that they could upgrade just fine, PHP is very backward-compatible. At some point we have to push them, this is simply unacceptable. And I will not accept it.
Can I get a R'amen
naderman wrote:In particular the implentation of hooks would benefit from this significantly. It's obvious that we screwed up any release cycle we originally had, so reevaluating such decisions now makes a lot of sense. We should add a warning like the 5.2 one to the next 3.0 release, and quickly communicate publically, that we will no longer support hosts that run extremely outdated software. Deciding to move 3.1 into stand still because some plans failed is the worst thing we can do now.
The version number bump is a red herring in this argument.
Erik Frèrejean wrote:No, the first post just states some potential benefits for this switch [snip], it however doesn't outlines how 3.1 will benefit of this (or is Doctrine at this point being considered for 3.1?). The RFC doesn't convince me that this change/limitation on this point bring anything crucial to 3.1 besides
+1, except for the snipped part, because I do argue several of the proposed "benefits."