Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:75862
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.192.52 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <53CE76BC.2030404@moonspot.net>
References: <84603C6F-F984-4F73-892A-4416391E4769@ajf.me>
	<FF53F427-6E40-439F-ADCC-A1AD0E808CA4@ajf.me>
	<53CE66D4.2060103@gmail.com>
	<E2A6CAD6-92BA-447E-A321-E55A0E52B314@ajf.me>
	<CAPgKKxVUZQfZo1GXM022-pFJ44iem_3CjpBTZHdj+hmv1qgC_A@mail.gmail.com>
	<53CE76BC.2030404@moonspot.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 16:41:48 +0200
Message-ID: <CAH-PCH7DKkZqukJWOkTiMYMCs7g4uNv9K1ENzQX92h3svWar9Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brian Moon <brian@moonspot.net>
Cc: Jonny Stirling <phoenix@jonstirling.co.uk>, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>, 
	Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com>, 
	"internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2e0a835898304fec939e2
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE][RFC] Name of Next Release of PHP
From: tyra3l@gmail.com (Ferenc Kovacs)

--001a11c2e0a835898304fec939e2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Brian Moon <brian@moonspot.net> wrote:

> Or, (maybe this is controversial in itself), drop the entire thing.
>>
>> Until there is in fact, a next major version, what its name will be is
>> surely moot, and until there is a GA release (or at the earliest alphas =
/
>> beta test releases), there should be no such thing as a versioned /
>> numbered release.
>>
>> Assuming the above, there is no need to discuss / vote on this now, but =
in
>> 1-3 years or so (depending on who you listen to ;)), and in that time
>> frame, shouldn't it simply remain as PHP.next (or some random codename /
>> whatever).
>>
>
> As I read this, it occurred to me that naming things before they are
> released is how we ended up in this situation to begin with. People start=
ed
> writing PHP6 books and doing talks at conferences before PHP6 even existe=
d.
> What if the same thing happens with PHP7? Or it happens to PHP6 again?
> Right now, there is discussion about phpng being php-next. What if that i=
s
> rolled in and later found that it was a bad idea? And there are talks and
> blog posts about "PHP7" that talk about phpng?
>
> With Phorum, we skipped version 2 and version 4 because of this issue. We
> named them, worked on them, and then decided they were bad directions.
> Those numbers were burned. If we had not named them to begin with, we wou=
ld
> not have been in that boat.
>
> Brian Moon
> brianlmoon@php.net
> http://brian.moonspot.net/
>
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
every branch has a version (main/php_version.h), phpng has 5.7.0 (because
that is what master had when branched out).
there are already some posts which refer to phpng as 5.7 (
http://www.reddit.com/r/PHP/comments/2arl1k/php_57_aka_phpng_is_now_nearly_=
twice_as_fast_as/
for example).
so I think that it is a bit naive to think that we can wait until the last
minute with coming up with the final release number, plus I think it is
better to discuss and get consensus before we have time-pressure to do so.

--=20
Ferenc Kov=C3=A1cs
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu

--001a11c2e0a835898304fec939e2--