Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:85385 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 94614 invoked from network); 21 Mar 2015 20:10:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 21 Mar 2015 20:10:10 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 77.193.237.4 4.237.193.77.rev.sfr.net Received: from [77.193.237.4] ([77.193.237.4:3176] helo=localhost.localdomain) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 83/8D-18917-F10DD055 for ; Sat, 21 Mar 2015 15:10:08 -0500 To: internals@lists.php.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes References: <000001d063ef$08af3ca0$1a0db5e0$@php.net> <550D96D0.7020406@lerdorf.com> <67EFB3DC-9F46-4FDE-B37E-A8642343D8B7@zend.com> Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2015 21:09:47 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable Message-ID: User-Agent: Opera Mail/1.0 (Win32) X-Posted-By: 77.193.237.4 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Proposal to delay 7.0 timeline From: bensor987@neuf.fr ("Benoit Schildknecht") Le Sat, 21 Mar 2015 18:44:23 +0100, Pierre Joye a= = =C3=A9crit: > On Mar 21, 2015 11:55 PM, "Zeev Suraski" wrote: >> >> >> >> Sent from my mobile >> >> > On 21 =D7=91=D7=9E=D7=A8=D7=A5 2015, at 18:05, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: >> > >> >> On 03/21/2015 08:52 AM, Fran=C3=A7ois Laupretre wrote: >> >> Now, after more calls from many of you to delay it, and as Zeev = >> himself >> >> seemed to consider it as more acceptable, I am proposing again to > delay 7.0 >> >> feature freeze to May, 15 (2 month delay, date where vote is > starting). I >> >> won=E2=80=99t repeat all the arguments of my previous posts but, t= o = >> summarize, > it >> >> would allow to include important features, making it a =E2=80=98re= al=E2=80=99 major > version. >> >> Releasing a major version is not just a question of BC break, we a= lso > need >> >> to think about what we put forward. So, we need features. We alrea= dy > have >> >> STH, but we can do more (I personally have at least 4 RFCs I didn=E2= =80=99t > have >> >> time for, including scalar pseudo-methods, which can be an importa= nt >> >> feature). >> > >> > No, please, let's get what we have stabilized and out the door. The= re >> > are always more things to do and we can delay things indefinitely. = = >> And I >> > completely disagree that this isn't a 'real' major version. >> >> +1 > > Same. > >> Zeev Same here, very bad idea