Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:58506 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 36866 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2012 16:49:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 2 Mar 2012 16:49:25 -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 209.85.213.170 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: pierre.php@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.213.170 mail-yx0-f170.google.com Received: from [209.85.213.170] ([209.85.213.170:63092] helo=mail-yx0-f170.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id B3/33-22821-41AF05F4 for ; Fri, 02 Mar 2012 11:49:25 -0500 Received: by yenl5 with SMTP id l5so974011yen.29 for ; Fri, 02 Mar 2012 08:49:22 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of pierre.php@gmail.com designates 10.236.72.230 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.236.72.230; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of pierre.php@gmail.com designates 10.236.72.230 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=pierre.php@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=pierre.php@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.236.72.230]) by 10.236.72.230 with SMTP id t66mr14666317yhd.45.1330706962247 (num_hops = 1); Fri, 02 Mar 2012 08:49:22 -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=wWVDiuoh46LMfD1sgoW+MW/zG+S4s0LDBoU2cHqtadc=; b=v8BHMjEPhawUlmk4Rp8LWWQw/VUONb5ATIRCjg1Mi/tuJ5MMXNIySMR+5VuYnEDhfw 2Mum4wi1d9gCbr4MLZL7kKgItp2Q5tfq0FYCn1LztMaXcdWhyIe/38mYtL0FUe0F6d0N Gb5gMpeONYPyQlbNytAay4CmNnswCReknDdFsafO/DgYFP035SKA4odkAVb1PMD4+SHj b9uD+Z+/7iGv6cY91iP5zqanwaGIpGlxrQjpQzFUSPq9Teuc1iW5CWQZDc/iOjAEfEuf AzX/J7zM4o4aoGjEHk/U7z69GEMr1BHQeuo9Aqnvw0pQHLni0+nbTEb5UQmg0jI5e55J GSNA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.236.72.230 with SMTP id t66mr11586864yhd.45.1330706962077; Fri, 02 Mar 2012 08:49:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.146.221.14 with HTTP; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 08:49:21 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4F50F8D5.9010306@php.net> References: <4F50EA41.1080706@php.net> <4F50F8D5.9010306@php.net> Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 17:49:21 +0100 Message-ID: To: Sebastian Bergmann Cc: 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) hi Sebastian, Thing is that we already have well defined lifecycle for anything after 5.4. So the question is only about 5.3. That's why, given that it is already a couple of years old, I would rather go with a statically defined EOL now. As php-next is very unlikely to be the moment where people will suddenly migrate. For any future release, it is static, release date + three years. On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Sebastian Bergmann wrot= e: > On 03/02/2012 10:54 AM, Pierre Joye wrote: >> >> And when do you think it is one year after php-next? In two years. So >> much about one year being the only option ;-) > > > =A0I am capable of learning, but that's besides the point. The point is > =A0static (two years after release) vs. dynamic (one year after next > =A0release). In a perfect world those two are the same. > > > -- > Sebastian Bergmann =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Co-Founder and = Principal Consultant > http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 http://thePHP.cc/ > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > --=20 Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org