Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:50581 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 388 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2010 00:19:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 26 Nov 2010 00:19:29 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ilia@prohost.org; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ilia@prohost.org; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain prohost.org designates 209.85.161.42 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ilia@prohost.org X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.161.42 mail-fx0-f42.google.com Received: from [209.85.161.42] ([209.85.161.42:46962] helo=mail-fx0-f42.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id E4/74-16484-11DFEEC4 for ; Thu, 25 Nov 2010 19:19:29 -0500 Received: by fxm11 with SMTP id 11so1191327fxm.29 for ; Thu, 25 Nov 2010 16:19:26 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.109.199 with SMTP id k7mr1402608fap.93.1290730765234; Thu, 25 Nov 2010 16:19:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.126.199 with HTTP; Thu, 25 Nov 2010 16:19:25 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <73.C4.59959.876BBEC4@pb1.pair.com> <3EA67EA2-A9B1-4DFB-8A30-05B37BCA313B@iki.fi> <8757232E56758B42B2EE4F9D2CA019C9154B70@US-EX2.zend.net> <1290705653.7033.73.camel@guybrush> <8757232E56758B42B2EE4F9D2CA019C9154C3B@US-EX2.zend.net> <1290707707.7033.115.camel@guybrush> <887FE7CFF6F8DE4BB3A9535F53AFD06A2C5D3910@il-ex2.zend.net> Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 19:19:25 -0500 Message-ID: To: Pierre Joye Cc: Zeev Suraski , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Johannes_Schl=FCter?= , Andi Gutmans , Jani Taskinen , "davey@php.net" , PHP Internals Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Hold off 5.4 From: ilia@prohost.org (Ilia Alshanetsky) I don't think the version # makes that much of a difference, but rather what is in it. That said, people have made a good point that jumping to something like 7, would allow us to skip the baggage associated with PHP6, which seems like a fairly compelling argument to me. On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 6:01 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: > On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 10:56 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote: >> I think that skipping to a major version is a good idea. > > It is appealing but not a good idea. I think it is better to get 5.4 > with the features we like in it and then consider a major version. > There are quite a few things that we could add or changethat would > justify a major version (without opening one of our pandora's boxes > right now :). > > As of versioning scheme, yes, a clear and documented one is the way. > Anything we can add to the RFC to clarify this would be welcome. Maybe > start a new thread, it is getting hard to follow each topic. > > Cheers, > -- > Pierre > > @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >