Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:58511
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.212.170 as permitted sender)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of kris.craig@gmail.com designates 10.216.137.147 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.216.137.147;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1330709339-sup-799@fewbar.com>
References: <CAEZPtU7qpMr9ZTX=+NDus05WA2RZ9A3rWNnHSr8WOBXjqbp4VQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F50EA41.1080706@php.net>
	<1330709339-sup-799@fewbar.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 10:54:01 -0800
Message-ID: <CAKOpQSw9PmE1xP4kFTV+DB6eK6fH352f5d1UaR7UGtzAYh=MfQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Clint Byrum <clint@ubuntu.com>
Cc: internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00504502caea9b0ed104ba47196b
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] discussions, about a 5.3 EOL
From: kris.craig@gmail.com (Kris Craig)

--00504502caea9b0ed104ba47196b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I'm probably missing something, but why not just do it like we did with
5.2?  I.e. we keep maintaining it until PHP 5.5, at which time we deprecate
it and be done with it?

Like I said, I'm probably missing something lol, so if someone could
explain why this is different I'd be much obliged!  =)

--Kris


On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Clint Byrum <clint@ubuntu.com> wrote:

> Excerpts from Sebastian Bergmann's message of Fri Mar 02 07:41:53 -0800
> 2012:
> > On 03/02/2012 07:34 AM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/php53eol
> >
> >   I discussed with Arne Blankerts and Stefan Priebsch over breakfast
> today
> >   and Stefan had an interesting idea: why not announce (now) that PHP 5.3
> >   will go into EOL a year after PHP 5.5 comes out?
> >
> >     * Now until PHP 5.5 comes out: bug and security fixes for PHP 5.3
> >     * From the release of PHP 5.5: security fixes for PHP 5.3 for a year
> >
> >   Ideally, PHP 5.5 would be out in a year from now, so it would come down
> >   to one year of bug and security fixes and one year of security fixes
> >   only. Makes sense to me.
> >
>
> Just chiming in from the Ubuntu side of things. I think this is the most
> predictable, and helpful plan for users and for distributors.
>
> From the user standpoint, its quite useful to know where you stand
> for upgrade path. This should make conservative users comfortable with
> using 5.3 on existing projects until 5.5 enters RC phase, and then they
> can start evaluating their options to move to 5.5 or 5.4, as they know
> they'll have a whole year to evaluate 5.5. If you put a clock on 5.3,
> and 5.5 slips for legitimate reasons, then they'll be stuck with 5.4
> only, and you may actually *miss* the opportunity to get people on the
> latest release.
>
> From a distribution standpoint, anything that lengthens the amount of time
> that PHP as a project fully supports a release makes our burden smaller,
> and gives our users a better chance at having stable software for the
> entire life of our LTS releases. Selfish, I know, but just stating the
> obvious fact.
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

--00504502caea9b0ed104ba47196b--