Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:52756
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.54 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
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=SFynLdSA/0Sdxo9j8xO5n/v4Cuvb8cscTKeIN/0ckZVOm/OyWdQw4cyC7PZXRJjXIc
         f/JDM1wedHd40fSRPnMCS6aew0A9pDgoMOgH/vFbW+GQAcwlBnS0kdz2LcZUGleaz96O
         PSjtdqwYogpwoQ87Iabo/1BkiuUSSsS7tFfNA=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTik-vKh=CMKxDMOkPSoKfdeRFyVr=w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTim2Tbw+9egfrmrYfeZfNNwYWcg4dg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DE6BE66.3070007@oracle.com>
	<BANLkTinAaFn=-UY2AXFhKZQ6fqqWZz92AQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTim5n6ekS++GX2r9VKV-tf7221oC_w@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinzrcHTB7yXdcrKG-9U6J_9xMw52Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimrNwFO7=svkN=L3qon45fUyLnLzg@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimsbDQ_dvom0BH_7UFVraf7ygS1EQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinnAJ5f9Up5_ZW_6tci62wnOV8Fag@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimAO60wfa4wKAMp7GJQHoQ9iwMC6A@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTik-vKh=CMKxDMOkPSoKfdeRFyVr=w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 13:21:30 +0200
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=tmWk4MUbAT=Yi9NyxkbuH2OrG6g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Lind <peter.e.lind@gmail.com>
Cc: Christopher Jones <christopher.jones@oracle.com>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Final version, RFC release process
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye)

On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Peter Lind <peter.e.lind@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2 June 2011 13:03, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Peter Lind <peter.e.lind@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 2 June 2011 12:40, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> *snip*
>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, it is the same that what we proposed. What we proposed is that
>>>> every release is actually a LTS release. What Ubuntu uses works fine
>>>> for distros given that it is a distro with an insane amount of totally
>>>> unrelated projects they distribute, and alternative repositories exist
>>>> for almost each of them.
>>>>
>>>> For a programming language, it is a totally different story.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That makes more sense - you were, however, arguing against random LTS
>>> releases which was rather confusing (there's a big difference between
>>> "every release is an LTS" and "all LTS releases are random" - those
>>> are not the only options).
>>
>> The randomness is about which release-features tuples would become a
>> LTS, that's something that can't apply well to a project like php.
>>
>
> It's hard to see how that would be any more or less random than now,
> given that it would still be a question of votes or consensus.

I was referring to accepted features. Once they are accepted (and
implemented), our proposal makes sure that they will be in the next
release, which will happen within a year. And this next release will
have the same lifetime than any other.

> Presumably, features would not be removed (unless they were bad for
> the language) and so they would still make it into LTS releases - the
> next one up.

That's a different topic and it is covered by the BC breakages policy.
Only major versions bump allows that.

>
> Anyway, I'll stop it here, as I doubt I'll convince you of anything
> (and vice versa).

Heh, that's why we discuss, exchange views and oppinions :)

> Just one thing to add: thanks for the work on PHP :) Much appreciated.

You are welcome :)

Cheers,
-- 
Pierre

@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org