Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:66323
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com does not designate 209.85.219.47 as permitted sender)
References: <435a322ccb14090d3bcf6bf8a110396d@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAH-PCH5wD99wYKxBo0mKK2QQkJe_toQP+4pB1KXCVfqCYVAoJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<512E7870.7010208@lerdorf.com>	<CAEZPtU6E1AHJSv5zhriu8GbAt1-XvjyA_2_NKDpVcPr-hpsp0w@mail.gmail.com>
	<0b8c20490dae9ecb9f9cd4a77cf47796@mail.gmail.com> <CAEZPtU6hgTF_Hp7F=X-U38YTsj6NGdsROQdg0ZZWQauqijYn1A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAEZPtU6hgTF_Hp7F=X-U38YTsj6NGdsROQdg0ZZWQauqijYn1A@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Thread-Index: AQJ3DSuB//AVAgGgZEkT5WvLzC9oRwHy3CcAALALoV8BmWG3ZwFihFeGAhYIsNSW/6IJIA==
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 15:06:07 +0200
Message-ID: <ac8835e7794fc8b90889591564ffd944@mail.gmail.com>
To: Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>
Cc: Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com>, Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com>, 
	PHP Developers Mailing List <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Integrating Zend Optimizer+ into the PHP distribution
From: zeev@zend.com (Zeev Suraski)

> This is amazing how you take every single opportunity to bash the new
release
> process, forgetting all pro arguments that have been brought in the last
> discussions.

I'm not bashing it.  I think the process is good.  I'm saying the
frequency is wrong and doesn't suit the needs of most of our users.

> Let me write them down again in (hopefully) a more understandable way:

You didn't state anything I wasn't aware of before, and yet, I still think
that a yearly release cycle is roughly 2x too frequent from where we
should be.

Most users don't upgrade because they don't need the new features and
can't be bothered to upgrade.

There's no such thing as 100% downwards compatibility, and 5.5 will be no
different in that sense from previous versions.  Perhaps it'll be three
nines instead of two nines (99.9% vs. 99%), but every keyword, every bug
fix, every change in an error reporting level - can break apps and make an
upgrade process non smooth.  We're not going to be able to change people's
perception.

Frequent releases are less easy to manage from just about any point.
Their one and only advantage is delivering features to the userbase more
quickly, which begs the question whether they're eagerly waiting for such
features.

In terms of upgrades - you have to spend more time upgrading & testing.
In terms of off-the-shelf-apps - you need to invest more in testing more
versions.  In terms of QA - fewer releases means less time spent in
testing.

> Instead of fighting it, what's about Zend talking about it to its so
numerous
> customers? For a change.

Zend has nothing to do with it.  We can't wave a magic wand and change
people's perception, habits or preferences.  Both our customers and the
companies I get to meet don't view a yearly release cycle favorably (most
of them - some do).

> I have discussed with many WP devs (and the lead), they all agree that
this
> process is a good thing and will help WP to move forward. It does not
mean they
> will stop to support older versions but they will change the recommended
> versions.

Process != frequency.  Our process is good, our frequency isn't.

> No, we do not. 5.4 code runs under 5.5 smoothly.

5.3 code runs smoothly on 5.4 too (except for ancient code using features
that have been deprecated for many many years).  Incompats have been blown
out of proportion - in the same way I can assure you the few incompats
between 5.4 and 5.5 will be blown out of proportion.

> Let me say it again, stop arguing and begin to promote and explain it to
your
> customers.

I admire your self-confidence, you seem to have enough of it for a whole
battalion of developers, but it's complete unwarranted in this case (as
well as other cases in recent weeks).  I think you're promoting a bad
thing for PHP, not because our users are idiots or fail to understand the
amazing advantages of a yearly release cycle - but because it's just bad.

Zeev