Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:49260 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 90171 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2010 15:14:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 10 Aug 2010 15:14:15 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=derick@php.net; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=derick@php.net; spf=unknown; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 82.113.146.227 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: derick@php.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 82.113.146.227 xdebug.org Linux 2.6 Received: from [82.113.146.227] ([82.113.146.227:48065] helo=xdebug.org) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 80/25-61991-5CC616C4 for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2010 11:14:15 -0400 Received: from localhost (xdebug.org [127.0.0.1]) by xdebug.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7121B10CEA0; Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:14:11 +0100 (BST) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:14:11 +0100 (BST) X-X-Sender: derick@kossu.derickrethans.nl To: =?UTF-8?Q?Johannes_Schl=C3=BCter?= cc: Internals In-Reply-To: <1281450642.969.2575.camel@guybrush> Message-ID: References: <1281429940.969.2093.camel@guybrush> <255073A3-5250-4962-875A-7B2E69E40A48@pooteeweet.org> <1281450642.969.2575.camel@guybrush> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="8323329-358597983-1281453251=:29410" Subject: Version management (was: Re: [PHP-DEV] 5.4 Alpha?) From: derick@php.net (Derick Rethans) --8323329-358597983-1281453251=:29410 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE On Tue, 10 Aug 2010, Johannes Schl=C3=BCter wrote: > 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). >=20 > Well, I don't see it as loooooooooooooooooooooooooong term support, but Using LTS as a term confused me on that one :P > 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. >=20 > We could also use the names "feature preview release" and "stable > release"(=3Dlts) ... which would bring us close to MySQL's model and thei= r > 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) I still don't think this is a good idea though. That would me we have=20 (as example) 5.2 in LTS, 5.6 as stable and 5.7 in trunk? How much do you=20 (at that point) like supporting a 4/5 year old version? Do you hvae that=20 much spare time? I think our current way work pretty well. There is 5.2 which is=20 security-fix supported, 5.3 that is supported and trunk/5.4 that's on=20 the way to alpha.=20 Derick --=20 http://derickrethans.nl | http://xdebug.org Like Xdebug? Consider a donation: http://xdebug.org/donate.php twitter: @derickr and @xdebug --8323329-358597983-1281453251=:29410--