Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:50329 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 16561 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2010 10:07:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 18 Nov 2010 10:07:00 -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 ns.km36107.keymachine.de Solaris 10 (beta) Received: from [217.114.211.66] ([217.114.211.66:42261] helo=config.schlueters.de) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 6E/A2-32235-3CAF4EC4 for ; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 05:07:00 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.31] (ppp-93-104-35-134.dynamic.mnet-online.de [93.104.35.134]) (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 325A344C6D; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 11:06:56 +0100 (CET) To: guilhermeblanco@gmail.com Cc: PHP internals In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 11:06:55 +0100 Message-ID: <1290074815.16819.93.camel@guybrush> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.4 - Meta attribute (aka. Annotations) support discussion From: johannes@schlueters.de (Johannes =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Schl=FCter?=) On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 15:07 -0200, guilhermeblanco@gmail.com wrote: > Hi folks, > > I'll start a series of topics (in this thread) about meta attribute > (aka. Annotations) discussion. Completely ignoring the actual issue, just in response to the subject: We should focus on getting 5.4 out. And not delay it for this. Rather go for a model with more frequent feature releases. (I mentioned multiple times that I'd like a Ubuntu-like model with releases all N months and every Mth release is a "long term" (whatever long means) supported version. Release branches should get finalized features only. This would give early access to new features thus motivating contributors while distributors know what they can use as a base) But this deserves it's own discussion. So for this thread: Feel free to discuss this subject, but not targeting 5.4 as said in the subject. johannes