Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:49258 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 83506 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2010 14:51:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 10 Aug 2010 14:51:13 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=johannes@schlueters.de; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=johannes@schlueters.de; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain schlueters.de from 217.114.211.66 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: johannes@schlueters.de X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.114.211.66 unknown Solaris 10 (beta) Received: from [217.114.211.66] ([217.114.211.66:57247] helo=config.schlueters.de) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 27/23-61991-992616C4 for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2010 10:30:50 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.31] (ppp-93-104-43-196.dynamic.mnet-online.de [93.104.43.196]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by config.schlueters.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3347924B86; Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:30:46 +0200 (CEST) To: Lukas Kahwe Smith Cc: Adam Harvey , Pierre Joye , Kalle Sommer Nielsen , Internals In-Reply-To: <255073A3-5250-4962-875A-7B2E69E40A48@pooteeweet.org> References: <1281429940.969.2093.camel@guybrush> <255073A3-5250-4962-875A-7B2E69E40A48@pooteeweet.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:30:42 +0200 Message-ID: <1281450642.969.2575.camel@guybrush> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] 5.4 Alpha? From: johannes@schlueters.de (Johannes =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Schl=FCter?=) On Tue, 2010-08-10 at 16:20 +0200, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote: > Is LTS really something we need to provide? Seems to me like this is > something the linux vendors take care of for the most part. Of course > this leaves windows, OSX (and maybe some others). Well, I don't see it as loooooooooooooooooooooooooong term support, but rather as way to enable quick feature cycles, so that feature releases can move faster than anybody can upgrade to them (ok, that's a bit too fast the, but hope you get the point), while new features can get in production sooner, where wanted. We could also use the names "feature preview release" and "stable release"(=lts) ... which would bring us close to MySQL's model and their confusing version numbering (MySQL 5.1 is the stable there, then MySQL 5.4 was announced as preview, now MySQL 5.5 is the current preview release, neither 5.4 nor 5.5 are "stable", "GA", though) johanne