Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:50345 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 74851 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2010 14:25:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 18 Nov 2010 14:25:05 -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] ([82.113.146.227:57927] helo=xdebug.org) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 9D/01-01108-04735EC4 for ; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 09:25:04 -0500 Received: from localhost (xdebug.org [127.0.0.1]) by xdebug.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87E60DE13F; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 14:25:01 +0000 (GMT) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 14:25:00 +0000 (GMT) X-X-Sender: derick@kossu.derickrethans.nl To: =?UTF-8?Q?Johannes_Schl=C3=BCter?= cc: guilhermeblanco@gmail.com, PHP internals In-Reply-To: <1290074815.16819.93.camel@guybrush> Message-ID: References: <1290074815.16819.93.camel@guybrush> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="8323329-900230880-1290090301=:26633" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.4 - Meta attribute (aka. Annotations) support discussion From: derick@php.net (Derick Rethans) --8323329-900230880-1290090301=:26633 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE On Thu, 18 Nov 2010, Johannes Schl=C3=BCter wrote: > On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 15:07 -0200, guilhermeblanco@gmail.com wrote: > > Hi folks, > >=20 > > I'll start a series of topics (in this thread) about meta attribute > > (aka. Annotations) discussion. >=20 > 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. Right, there is no way this will be ready for next week's alpha. Derick --=20 http://derickrethans.nl | http://xdebug.org Like Xdebug? Consider a donation: http://xdebug.org/donate.php twitter: @derickr and @xdebug --8323329-900230880-1290090301=:26633--