Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:50479 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 4656 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2010 01:07:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 25 Nov 2010 01:07:26 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=pierre.php@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=pierre.php@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.161.42 as permitted sender) DomainKey-Status: bad X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: pierre.php@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.161.42 mail-fx0-f42.google.com Received: from [209.85.161.42] ([209.85.161.42:54608] helo=mail-fx0-f42.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 99/13-12084-CC6BDEC4 for ; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 20:07:25 -0500 Received: by fxm11 with SMTP id 11so317419fxm.29 for ; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 17:07:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=FhpSXgH7uEoJ1vP3M9Ei9MTS/TIepxROtG1UeMREBmw=; b=vXVClYYWICyE5c/hgcm8CuGSQjbSIa5rZP/YpMrs0af0RL6beut+NjA7tSFSCvcIWf BzMQ14RP8Skh1Tyy97CMt2JYJS4yEirhwevthHF3mT0D5auQPRBDPSd1R+I+3VYoQb3I vZ5/W8FB2IwN1s7KBqK/nVIRi4npBgxFms4y0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=nyneRLdrhdetD8k7yeIkNimpqfrUEaMdwgOcQwgSpgdLYjBYhJomAKWq+2PjAJ/CUR WjG8x4cOZQaClNhbhynWVgvBhnBJ1oDFR7Ic4oZuKz8WH1OTq9VjnUMTHAy8ILItFefn ImoTaYhxDMCurPNnww4QaPAOciE+otUp5xeiA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.125.136 with SMTP id y8mr45484far.149.1290647242089; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 17:07:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.83.142 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 17:07:22 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <1290504719.2294.251.camel@guybrush> Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 02:07:22 +0100 Message-ID: To: Ilia Alshanetsky Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Johannes_Schl=FCter?= , Felipe Pena , internals Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Release Process From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye) hi, 2010/11/23 Ilia Alshanetsky : > I think support 5 or even 3 parallel versions will be highly > impractical and extra-ordinarily challenging. I think we need a plan > that limits us to 2 versions and perhaps a 3rd one for critical > security fixes only. Yes, that's what the two examples tried to show. Also reducing the bugs fixing period (move earlier to security mode only) could help a lot. Having one release in bugs fixes mode and two in security only is not too much work. The one thing we have to improve to achieve this goal (be 2 or 3 active versions) is to share tests infrastructure. At our labs we are working on improving our tests platforms with more BC tests, performance/stress tests and apps testing using the usual apps (wp, joomla, drupal, etc.) with setup and usage. We would like to add frameworks too soonish, but for that we would prefer to work with the framework directly. Doing so will let us tests a RC withing a couple of days with a high level of confidence. I also think that with a bug fixes and security only mode will reduce a release period to a month (2 RCs) for 99% of the releases. Feel free to ping me if you are one of the QA lead/lead of a framework or app and have a tests suite ready to be used. Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org