Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:76564 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 81886 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2014 18:25:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 15 Aug 2014 18:25:17 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 108.166.43.75 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 108.166.43.75 smtp75.ord1c.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [108.166.43.75] ([108.166.43.75:57408] helo=smtp75.ord1c.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id AA/6A-48767-B805EE35 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 14:25:15 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp10.relay.ord1c.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 4296E38037E; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 14:25:12 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp10.relay.ord1c.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id CBB94380593; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 14:25:11 -0400 (EDT) X-Sender-Id: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com Received: from Stass-MacBook-Pro.local (108-66-6-48.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [108.66.6.48]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA) by 0.0.0.0:465 (trex/5.2.10); Fri, 15 Aug 2014 18:25:12 GMT Message-ID: <53EE5087.9040305@sugarcrm.com> Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 11:25:11 -0700 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ferenc Kovacs , Jan Ehrhardt CC: PHP Internals References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Status of PHP 5.4 From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > the release process rfc (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/releaseprocess) governs > the releases since 5.4: 2+1 year of support after the initial X.Y.0 release. > as pointed out, 5.4 is already past the 2 years of bugfix support, so we > should announce it that it is on security fixes only. 5.4.32 is already in RC and will be released next week. 5.4.33-dev is already containing some non-security fixes. So we could just arbitrarily announce that starting noon today we stop accepting non-security bugfixes into 5.4, or we could choose a less arbitrary cutoff - such as release of 5.6 or 5.4.33. I would prefer the less arbitrary route, I don't see much harm in having the bugfixes last a little longer, but having more natural version succession - i.e. saying we always have 2 stable branches and one in security fixes. > process rfc and announce the extended support and EOL dates based on the > original release date, or update the releaseprocess RFC to state that we > move into extended support/EOL when the the new version in that year is > released. I think it would be more natural and accommodating for the realities of the release process. The thing is we will have delays, we will have bad RCs, we will have people going on vacations or being too busy, and having a scheme that can accept this while still preserving the general structure seems better to me than literal day-counting. If this means 5.4 has extra 1/2 year of bugfixes - I don't see big harm done by that. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/