Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:55901 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 45040 invoked from network); 22 Oct 2011 15:02:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 22 Oct 2011 15:02:48 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=johannes@schlueters.de; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=johannes@schlueters.de; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain schlueters.de from 217.114.211.66 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: johannes@schlueters.de X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.114.211.66 config.schlueters.de Received: from [217.114.211.66] ([217.114.211.66:39259] helo=config.schlueters.de) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 56/01-39053-61BD2AE4 for ; Sat, 22 Oct 2011 11:02:47 -0400 Received: from [192.168.2.230] (ppp-93-104-48-244.dynamic.mnet-online.de [93.104.48.244]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by config.schlueters.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 64DB6771D1; Sat, 22 Oct 2011 17:02:43 +0200 (CEST) To: Pierre Joye Cc: Lester Caine , internals , Clint Byrum In-Reply-To: References: <1319230096-sup-4515@fewbar.com> <4EA2D317.7000806@lsces.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2011 17:02:33 +0200 Message-ID: <1319295753.1520.0.camel@guybrush> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.3.9 and is_a changes From: johannes@schlueters.de (Johannes =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Schl=FCter?=) On Sat, 2011-10-22 at 16:39 +0200, Pierre Joye wrote: > hi, > > On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Lester Caine wrote: > > > > There is also a lot to be said for going with what is known to be stable for > > an LTS release. > > Please do not begin with this discussion again. It is confusing for > the readers and totally unrelated. There is no LTS in the release > process RFC but every release has a fixed lifetime. This discussion is about Ubuntu LTS. So 5.4 might be a valid choice for them. johannes