Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:55915
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.161.170 as permitted sender)
References: <1319230096-sup-4515@fewbar.com> <CADNQb0WB21maZO3aPcyyU8aW7_tXFpCZajQ1GOZjEdSxgJYsOw@mail.gmail.com> <1319406871-sup-6862@fewbar.com> <20111024072158.GA7086@cobija.connexer.com>
In-Reply-To: <20111024072158.GA7086@cobija.connexer.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <14DDCD5D-A826-439F-A834-AA3A037D216A@gmail.com>
Cc: Clint Byrum <clint@ubuntu.com>, internals <internals@lists.php.net>,
 pkg-php-maint <pkg-php-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 09:39:52 -0400
To: sean finney <seanius@seanius.net>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [php-maint] [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.3.9 and is_a changes
From: bproctor2@gmail.com (Brad Proctor)

Just my two cents,

Most likely someone that has a system that they expect to last for five year=
s is going to set it up and forget about it. So they probably don't care tha=
t it's up to date.  They just want it to work.

If not they'll likely either compile their own php or be updating their syst=
em long before five years is up.

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 24, 2011, at 3:21 AM, sean finney <seanius@seanius.net> wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 03:36:04PM -0700, Clint Byrum wrote:
>> I appreciate the sentiments of all who have weighed in on this, and I
>> do want to make sure that we are paying attention to the greater PHP
>> community's needs, not just Ubuntu's users. Shipping really old PHP
>> versions is definitely not what we want to do.
>=20
> At the same time, in 5 years I don't think 5.4 will be that much "newer"
> feeling than a late 5.3 release, both will likely not be supported by
> the PHP authors, and people will complain that it's out of date no
> matter what.  So imo it's ultimately a matter of which version is more
> stable and can be better supported by the package maintainers and security=

> teams in question.  I don't yet have an opinion on that, but would defer
> to other members of the debian team if they did.
>=20
> And note that just because it's the default/supported version does not mea=
n
> that those distro-users are left up the creek without a paddle.  Both ubun=
tu
> and debian provide multiple avenues for stable/LTS users to get newer soft=
ware
> installed from backport/ppa type repositories, and they're also free to
> install from source if those packages do not meet their needs.
>=20
>> 4) We need it *at least* in Debian experimental, preferrably in
>> Debian unstable.  I have not discussed this at all with the Debian PHP
>> maintainers, so this is a big unknown. I've cc'd them for their comment.
>> I do see that 5.4.0 beta is in experimental as of yesterday, so I suspect=

>> this will happen naturally.
>=20
> I'm not sure we have a solid plan/timeline on this, but FYI if you sync'd t=
he
> last 5.3.x version from us the source package was slightly fubar'd (someho=
w
> got turned into a native package).  We'll probably fix it with an epoch'd
> upload or just wait until 5.4 is ready enough for unstable, but I don't th=
ink
> we've decided on which yet.
>=20
>=20
>    sean
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>=20