Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:58504 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 25858 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2012 16:36:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 2 Mar 2012 16:36:46 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=pierre.php@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=pierre.php@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.213.42 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: pierre.php@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.213.42 mail-yw0-f42.google.com Received: from [209.85.213.42] ([209.85.213.42:64492] helo=mail-yw0-f42.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id F2/A0-22821-C17F05F4 for ; Fri, 02 Mar 2012 11:36:45 -0500 Received: by yhfq11 with SMTP id q11so961930yhf.29 for ; Fri, 02 Mar 2012 08:36:42 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of pierre.php@gmail.com designates 10.236.181.74 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.236.181.74; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of pierre.php@gmail.com designates 10.236.181.74 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=pierre.php@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=pierre.php@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.236.181.74]) by 10.236.181.74 with SMTP id k50mr14845891yhm.62.1330706202363 (num_hops = 1); Fri, 02 Mar 2012 08:36:42 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ef39T2UzWGurI353yQyxtUcxMEcc23OYHDxr4HCnnDY=; b=jkMhOuN9OEJ9GoMGFCF8q76D0POI3qt7VYBIxUiWcq5m6bKap5+KOHX4iS6HrAkaue O4ojiutazLoYgPUNTxq6TTeVcfTmLuAcFuRN7/gUsgJPM+qd51m34Wpx31/FmYSc/p8X JmpPXrW+vANhTfFVks9tDgtUGgWBvLlueUe4d0ouGbLzke9M9HtgjX0dPATjZQUU0bbN uE2TI+mUjvAYAuXlXTdyrN0bVKof4bsY3jZBXtdZYFioFAcHynP/rEfQVWQOQ9B+YbtD Qbs/rnxN7Q48RtCxTbJ/AXMZn+8E1U2lQhZu36Y90l7SduuEEssGFecL94VYJJVFaWNO ejGw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.236.181.74 with SMTP id k50mr11735368yhm.62.1330706202295; Fri, 02 Mar 2012 08:36:42 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.146.221.14 with HTTP; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 08:36:42 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <4F50EA41.1080706@php.net> Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 17:36:42 +0100 Message-ID: To: Ferenc Kovacs Cc: Sebastian Bergmann , internals@lists.php.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] discussions, about a 5.3 EOL From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye) they are totally unrelated. The discussion here is not about whether next will be late but when 5.3 will end. The key here is not the date itself but the ability for hosting companies, distros, etc. to plan a migration or an EOL. One or two months less or more do not change anything, as long as the support of a given branch is inside the plan (three years from every new release from 5.4 and later). On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: >> >> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote: >> >> > that's just the schedule >> >> Yes, and as of now this is the plan. The idea is the same, that does >> not affect the EOL of 5.3 is php-next is a month late, not at all. >> > > yep, and I explained why I think that it is a bad idea if the releases an= d > the EOLs can shift apart. > > -- > Ferenc Kov=E1cs > @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu --=20 Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org