This is an old revision of the document!

PHP RFC: Name of Next Release of PHP


There has been some debate over what the name of the next major release of PHP, to succeed the PHP 5.x series, should be called. This RFC is an attempt to settle the matter once and for all.

Unlike most RFCs, this deals with a release process issue, and not with extending PHP itself.


This RFC proposes that the next major release of PHP (PHP NEXT or PHP x+1), to succeed the PHP 5.x series, shall be named either PHP 6, or PHP 7, based on the result of the vote.

The Case for PHP 6

PHP 6 is the most obvious name choice as it follows the existing numbering scheme. Do we really need to break from it?

The main argument against this is that there was previously a project, which was abandoned in 2010, also called PHP 6. There have been many discussions about it in the past and some books and articles dealing with it exist, and this could cause confusion. Essentially, we would be naming a new version with the same name as a previous, but never properly released and abandoned version. A little looking at Amazon reveals that some of these “PHP 6” books do not actually cover PHP 6 at all, and many of the books are of poor quality. Furthermore, I expect that we could easily clarify if necessary that this PHP 6 was not the subject of those books, and I think that much would be obvious to users given that the new PHP 6 would be released in 2015 at the very earliest, more than 5 years after all existing “PHP 6” books would have been published.

The Case for PHP 7

The case for choosing 7 as the next major version for PHP is comprised from 2 key elements - there are no good reasons not to do it, and several good reasons to do it.

No good reasons NOT to skip version 6

Regarding the first element, it seems that many people are concerned that if we skip a version, we somehow cause confusion or break away from our versioning scheme.

The main confusion point cited by proponents of 'PHP 6' was that people will wonder 'how come we suddenly have PHP 7 and without having PHP 6?' - however, this is really much more of a trivia question than a cause for confusion. For obvious reasons, it will be clear that 7 is the latest version and even if there is 6 out there, 7 is newer and better.

We also wouldn't be breaking away or even changing our current versioning scheme. We're only skipping a version, while keeping everything about our versioning scheme intact.

Strong reasons of why we actually should skip version 6 into 7

There are several reasons of why we shouldn't reuse version 6 for the next major version of PHP.

  • First and foremost, PHP 6 already existed and it was something completely different. The decimal system (or more accurately the infinite supply of numbers we have) makes it easy for us to skip a version, with plenty more left for future versions.
  • While it's it's true that the other PHP 6 never reached general availability, it was still a very widely published and known project conducted by php.net that will share absolutely nothing with the version that is under discussion now. Anybody who knew what PHP 6 is (and there are many) will have a strong misconception in his mind as to the contents and features of this new upcoming version (essentially, that it's all about Unicode).
  • PHP 6, the original PHP 6, has been discussed in detail in many PHP conferences. It was taught to users as a done deal, including detailed explanations about behavior (by php.net developers, not evil book authors).
  • There's lots of PHP 6 information, about the original PHP 6, that exists around the web. Books is the smallest part of the problem.
  • Unlike the 'trivia question' of 'why did we skip into 7?', reusing version 6 is likely to call real confusion in people's minds, with ample information on two completely different versions with entirely different feature sets that are called in exactly the same name.
  • Version 6 is generally associated with failure in the world of dynamic languages. PHP 6 was a failure; Perl 6 was a failure. Why associated ourselves with failure?
  • It's actually associated with failure also outside the dynamic language world - MySQL 6 also existed but never released.

To summarize, PHP 6 is a living memory in the minds of many developers - internals and PHP community alike; Reusing it will cause unnecessary confusion while gaining nothing.

Other than having good reasons to skip 6 and no reasons not to, there are also some minor reasons of why PHP 7 is actually a nicer choice:

  • Skipping versions isn't unprecedented or uncommon in both open source projects and commercial products. MariaDB, jumped all the way up to version 10.0 to avoid confusion. Java jumped from version 1.4 to version 5.0.
  • 7 is perceived as a lucky number in both the Western world and Chinese culture. A little bit of luck never hurt anybody. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numbers_in_Chinese_culture


A 50%+1 (simple majority) vote with two options, “PHP 6” and “PHP 7”, is proposed. If more votes are for PHP 6, that shall be the name of the next major release of PHP. Otherwise, if more of votes are for PHP 7, that shall be its name.

Voting started 2014-07-20 and ends 2014-07-27.

Shall PHP NEXT be called PHP 6, or PHP 7?
Real name PHP 6 PHP 7
aeoris (aeoris)  
ajf (ajf)  
andi (andi)  
ben (ben)  
brandon (brandon)  
bwoebi (bwoebi)  
colder (colder)  
crodas (crodas)  
davey (davey)  
derick (derick)  
Fabien Potencier (fabpot)  
frozenfire (frozenfire)  
guilhermeblanco (guilhermeblanco)  
gwynne (gwynne)  
hradtke (hradtke)  
jwage (jwage)  
kassner (kassner)  
kriscraig (kriscraig)  
levim (levim)  
lstrojny (lstrojny)  
marco (marco)  
mbeccati (mbeccati)  
mfonda (mfonda)  
mrook (mrook)  
nikic (nikic)  
pajoye (pajoye)  
peehaa (peehaa)  
philstu (philstu)  
pollita (pollita)  
ralphschindler (ralphschindler)  
ramsey (ramsey)  
rdlowrey (rdlowrey)  
rdohms (rdohms)  
sean (sean)  
sebastian (sebastian)  
seld (seld)  
stas (stas)  
thorstenr (thorstenr)  
weierophinney (weierophinney)  
zeev (zeev)  
Count: 15 25


rfc/php6.1405838255.txt.gz · Last modified: 2017/09/22 13:28 (external edit)