Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Roadmaps for 4.0.0 and 5.0.0 #300

Closed
bradynpoulsen opened this issue Jun 17, 2019 · 25 comments
Closed

Roadmaps for 4.0.0 and 5.0.0 #300

bradynpoulsen opened this issue Jun 17, 2019 · 25 comments
Assignees

Comments

@bradynpoulsen
Copy link

I'd be interested in helping to stabilize the v4 code APIs. Do you have a roadmap on what is still needing to be completed?

@jansor
Copy link

jansor commented Feb 20, 2020

Hi, just curious, is their any timeline when this would be released?

@mtyeh411
Copy link

on a similar note, how would we grade the stability of current latest (4.0-alpha)? should it not be considered production-ready? if so, what is work is outstanding to reach stable/production-ready?

@lcobucci
Copy link
Owner

lcobucci commented Feb 26, 2020

Hey folks, sorry for the delayed response (I was on family vacations 😄).

The plan for v4.0 is essentially this:

The first 2 items are the ones which would modify the API, apart from that everything is pretty much stable. Although I do use the alpha version in production, I'd suggest you wait until those items are done to avoid having to modify things on your apps (or you use it knowing that things will change).

I don't have a timeline (sorry) but my hope is to tackle these things in the upcoming months (after I release a new version of @chimeraphp packages).

@GrahamCampbell
Copy link

Require PHP 7.4

Which features are you looking to use from PHP 7.4?

@Ocramius
Copy link
Sponsor Collaborator

Ocramius commented Mar 1, 2020

Just bumping the min version to current stable is sufficient 👍

Besides that, typed properties, obviously

@ZhangChengLin
Copy link

Are you planning to change from the BSD 3 license to the MIT license after version 4?
@lcobucci

@lcobucci
Copy link
Owner

@ZhangChengLin we can surely change, AFAIK BSD-3 is as permissive as MIT so I didn't bother to change back then. However, I'm not an expert in that area and if that's an issue for you I can definitely modify it.

@ZhangChengLin
Copy link

ZhangChengLin commented May 30, 2020

@ZhangChengLin we can surely change, AFAIK BSD-3 is as permissive as MIT so I didn't bother to change back then. However, I'm not an expert in that area and if that's an issue for you I can definitely modify it.

I do n’t know much about this either. I just see that many projects are using the MIT license, so I feel that if they are the same, then maybe you can introduce more about the idea of ​​using this license in the readme.5.5k star, Someone can give you the answer you want.

I think that the current license has no effect on me.

@Ocramius
Copy link
Sponsor Collaborator

Ocramius commented May 30, 2020 via email

@GrahamCampbell
Copy link

RE PHP version stats from composer, only 1 in 5 people are using PHP 7.4. PHP 7.2 is still the most popular version...

@ZhangChengLin
Copy link

BSD/MIT are pretty much the same: changing license is much more effort (need to hunt down all previous contributors and ask for their opinion)

I don't understand this, so it's so troublesome?

@Ocramius
Copy link
Sponsor Collaborator

Ocramius commented May 30, 2020 via email

@GrahamCampbell
Copy link

GrahamCampbell commented Jun 25, 2020

Besides that, typed properties, obviously

It all your properties are private, typing them in the language is only gonna give you a slowdown at runtime for no benefits, compared to using a static analyzer and phpdoc?

@Ocramius
Copy link
Sponsor Collaborator

It will add runtime invariants, should any initialisation escape our analysis.

In general, the overhead is negligible, compared to the advantages: if you are worried about this kind of overhead, you can write a plugin to drop all typed properties post installation.

@Ocramius
Copy link
Sponsor Collaborator

Besides, adding types explicitly can aid compilers and reflectors 👍

@GrahamCampbell
Copy link

you can write a plugin to drop all typed properties post installation.

That would be a bad idea, if someone is reflecting on the code. ;)

@Potherca
Copy link

I'm getting the feeling that the PHP7.4 yay/nay discussion might be better served elsewhere....

Regardless, I'd be very interested in having JWK support, to the point of adding it myself but for PHP 7.2 and higher, as that is indeed the constraint for the libs I am currently integrating with...

@bradjones1
Copy link

Per the PHP 7 question I agree with @Potherca this is a bit off-topic here and also, this ship has sailed months ago. The README was updated last week.

I am a co-maintainer of the Simple OAuth/OpenID Connect module for Drupal and have an interest in #32, per above (so will also take a look at #339, which is indicated as a blocker.)

@chris-doehring
Copy link

chris-doehring commented Oct 31, 2020

I would really appreciate the release of a stable version 4.x before the php 8 GA next month. As you may know, this package is an important dependency to others, and it would block them to upgrade to php 8.

@lcobucci If you like, I could create a PR where I make version 3.3 compatible to php 8, but that could mean dropping support for php 5.* (due to phpunit). Depending on your priorities, this would give you some more time to prepare version 4.

@lcobucci
Copy link
Owner

@chris-doehring my plan is to release v4 before php 8.0 GA - or at least really close to it.

I want for v3.x to only serve as migration path for the new API, the only tricky thing is to backport BC-breaking changes.

@driesvints
Copy link

@lcobucci is there anything I can do to help out? Currently this is blocking PHP 8 support on league/oauth2-server and laravel/passport. Let me know what can be done to speed this up :)

@driesvints
Copy link

@driesvints
Copy link

@lcobucci so If I go by #300 (comment) it seems #452, #339 & " Backport changes to v3.x in a BC-compatible manner to create a migration path" are the only three things left for v4? #339 is a bit out of date it seems but do you have any more feedback for those PRs? Not sure what you mean with the backport of changes to v3?

@lcobucci
Copy link
Owner

lcobucci commented Nov 9, 2020

Okay, folks, I took some time to organise stuff - about time, right? (sorry).

So I have some dates which I'm aiming for v4.0.0-beta1 and v3.4.0 (assigned on the milestones) and added issues to backport stuff.

v4.0.0-beta1 issues: https://github.com/lcobucci/jwt/milestones/4.0.0-beta1
v3.4.0 issues: https://github.com/lcobucci/jwt/milestones/3.4.0

With that said, I'll be closing this issue and invest some time reaching those expected dates.
I hope this gives the necessary information.

Any help on getting stuff done is really appreciated!

@lcobucci lcobucci closed this as completed Nov 9, 2020
@lcobucci lcobucci self-assigned this Nov 9, 2020
@driesvints
Copy link

That's great @lcobucci! I'll check those out soon to see if I can help out there 👍

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests