I dont understand the compat-centric decisions being made for major version changes. It's as if the user-base count is the #1 priority. Many gridlock arguments because of this :(
Things as simple as fixing ternary associativity that has been broken and discouraged forever are basically DOA because it may break some tiny % of code that relies on broken behavior. They have a valid point that simply fixing it will break code in silent ways. So there was a possibility of making it unassociative in 7.0, throwing a warning and only fixing it for real in 5 years during the next major cycle. I don't know if this migration path will even happen.
Things as simple as fixing ternary associativity that has been broken and discouraged forever are basically DOA because it may break some tiny % of code that relies on broken behavior. They have a valid point that simply fixing it will break code in silent ways. So there was a possibility of making it unassociative in 7.0, throwing a warning and only fixing it for real in 5 years during the next major cycle. I don't know if this migration path will even happen.