Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:50591 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 43920 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2010 19:27:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 26 Nov 2010 19:27:38 -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] ([209.85.161.42:63749] helo=mail-fx0-f42.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 4B/EC-61791-82A00FC4 for ; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 14:27:36 -0500 Received: by fxm11 with SMTP id 11so1845322fxm.29 for ; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 11:27:33 -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 :content-transfer-encoding; bh=6p/DPwQJl34XN6FgrCzNxW0K5uByuwV8jkpszTBqU5Q=; b=ChvDUdH3M+MovvMCEfwj+Uxu2XzrFw++tyZ8tkLNjfVZyUH55DGH5G0veIi5OEIVen eZKJwvjtwqHTpJNL7KCFC5cZx+xJyuUtVyPum2aIJFWDHqxruzxm71jIImD/5qyPb6da 623Pm8g7aAx3Z4ZDbo0IXeYNjferGKVba7YTs= 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:content-transfer-encoding; b=GmK6Zdmjt6G4Wrq1CzR0dB5lJxTSibpSjQRh4ilrTmpDz8UbK5YdOuMnyCeXcHbhT1 RDAuzSveiAPJ/TvyHbYx6hHKqJn309b4vHCblzRXHFjC9enXy0ZB/DtVzKdRgA8Mj6GS Dfy/xZSuUtrOOasi4yl+XhE4sARBIn1m6wzu4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.72.1 with SMTP id k1mr2426500faj.111.1290799653514; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 11:27:33 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.83.142 with HTTP; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 11:27:33 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <887FE7CFF6F8DE4BB3A9535F53AFD06A2C5D4B7B@il-ex2.zend.net> 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> <887FE7CFF6F8DE4BB3A9535F53AFD06A2C5D4808@il-ex2.zend.net> <887FE7CFF6F8DE4BB3A9535F53AFD06A2C5D4B7B@il-ex2.zend.net> Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 20:27:33 +0100 Message-ID: To: Zeev Suraski Cc: Ilia Alshanetsky , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Johannes_Schl=FCter?= , Andi Gutmans , Jani Taskinen , "davey@php.net" , PHP Internals Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Hold off 5.4 From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye) On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote: > I'll begin again by saying I don't feel strongly about renaming 5.4 as 7.= 0, but there are some important points worth bringing up: > > 1. The motivation for changing major version numbers was *never* BC break= age. =A0It was substantial language changes/additions and sometimes substan= tial underlying engine changes. =A0BC breakage was typically a side effect = of that. No, but it was the main reasons. > 2. =A0Marketing does not equate Evil. =A0There's nothing bad about making= good moves that improve the perception of PHP in its userbase or the world= at large. =A0Turning the current trunk version into a major version can be= perceived as a 'marketing' move - but that doesn't mean it's not legit. = =A0Other than showing that the PHP project is moving along, there's also th= e warm-fuzzy-feeling aspect, and based on the last couple of days it's clea= r I'm not the only one that feels bad about being stuck in 5.x for over 6 y= ears with no change in sight. Right, and it was not meant badly. Only that it has no technical or features-wise reasons to do so but brings its lots of risks with it. > 3. The motivation to skip 6 doesn't stem from marketing at all. =A0The ma= in motivation is that there's a VERY concrete perception amongst many users= about what PHP 6 is. Leaving the very small conference crowd for a second: nobody never ever heard of php6 before the total fiasco a couple of months ago. > What we call that version, whether it's PHP 5.4, PHP 7.0 or even PHP 3000= , shouldn't change the way we discuss contents for it. =A0The fact I want t= o call the very same thing we intend to release with a different name has a= bsolutely nothing to do with the pains we experimented with 5.3 or 6.0. Let say I know us too good and I don't think moving it to a major version will be of any help. > We can agree to disagree (and again - whatever - I'm fine with 5.4!), Right, but I really don't like that the feelings, wishes, requests and will of most of the active developers seem to be totally ignored by a couple of us. That's not what I like to see in a project like php.net. There is clearly a need to change the way we work, communicate and decide things (be releases, features, etc.). Like it or not, that's a fact. Other example, you do not want this type hinting, but what do you do to change that? Why do you simply ignore it? > but no need to invent unrelated horror stories :) Invent horror stories? Maybe you should take a bit more parts of the day to day releases and development to see that they are not invented stories :). Cheers, --=20 Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org