Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:14977 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 14846 invoked by uid 1010); 15 Feb 2005 16:50:30 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 14808 invoked from network); 15 Feb 2005 16:50:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 15 Feb 2005 16:50:30 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 80.74.107.235 mail.zend.com Linux 2.5 (sometimes 2.4) (4) Received: from ([80.74.107.235:35138] helo=mail.zend.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 1.2.11rc1 (r4431)) with SMTP id 7E/C8-08075-C7322124 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 11:29:49 -0500 Received: (qmail 18592 invoked from network); 15 Feb 2005 16:29:45 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO zeev-notebook.zend.com) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 15 Feb 2005 16:29:45 -0000 Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050215182040.056cc500@localhost> X-Sender: zeev@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 18:29:44 +0200 To: Rasmus Lerdorf Cc: "D.Walsh" ,PHPdev In-Reply-To: <421187FF.5000706@lerdorf.com> References: <59389e98fc650b5609e63cd2de28d863@daleenterprise.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20050214162726.03794bd0@localhost> <200502150114.j1F1E29s030012@box2.fiddy8.com> <4e89b42605021417572dc61cd6@mail.gmail.com> <59389e98fc650b5609e63cd2de28d863@daleenterprise.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Anyone against requiring libxml2 2.6.x for PHP5.1? From: zeev@zend.com (Zeev Suraski) At 07:26 15/02/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: >D.Walsh wrote: >>On Feb 14, 2005, at 23:49, Adam Maccabee Trachtenberg wrote: >> >>>Well, that's below 2.5.11, which is what we currently require, so >>>those folks are already out of luck. >>> >>>Meanwhile, Mac OS 10.4 is at 2.6.16, so that's okay. I don't have a >>>10.3 machine with me here at LinuxWorld, so I can't check that. >> >>OSX 10.3 is at 2.5.4 > >At the same time, why would people on older operating systems who are >obviously quite conservative when it comes to upgrading suddenly try to >upgrade to the very latest PHP? As long as we don't move the goalposts >beyond the latest releases of the various main operating systems I think >we are fine. At the end of the day it's a fact that lots of people use the latest version of PHP on exceptionally old systems. Some of the reasons I can think of off hand: - Because they're new comers to PHP, and the first version they try may already be too 'demanding' for their server - Because of a (somewhat justified, but not quite) perception that the latest (major) PHP version is more secure, and because PHP is much more visible to them than some library(*) - Because they want specific features in the latest version of PHP, and the same (*) applies here too. There are probably other reasons I didn't think about. People who follow PHP don't necessarily follow all of PHP's dependencies. In my experience they rarely do. Zeev (*) The average PHP user will easily tell you that he's using PHP, but he's much less likely to know that he's using libxml2, and will almost definitely not know which version of libxml2 he's using. We can't assert that because someone is upgrading to new major versions of PHP, he shows the same level of interest in OS/library updates.