Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:89556
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.50 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <566023E0.1010903@php.net>
References: <DUB128-W930E1C18231D67D9FA0DE7BA060@phx.gbl>
	<045401d12cd3$d7d57ff0$87807fd0$@belski.net>
	<565EA53F.5050507@php.net>
	<047301d12cdd$5e248020$1a6d8060$@belski.net>
	<565FD845.7090502@php.net>
	<005801d12da1$fc169ce0$f443d6a0$@belski.net>
	<C68F8D40-A665-4663-B62F-9C32E3FB1181@zend.com>
	<CAEZPtU7afsY2ET=dWCvtBtFZw6QEJXtJDKV6itzSHtk767Ov-A@mail.gmail.com>
	<566023E0.1010903@php.net>
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 13:17:04 +0100
Message-ID: <CAH-PCH42HjgxvhNr8G48U==i6vx7Fy8hiu9kR7hWOaV+FM7+_w@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Fran=C3=A7ois_Laupretre?= <francois@php.net>
Cc: Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com>, 
	Anatol Belski <anatol.php@belski.net>, Sebastian Bergmann <sebastian@php.net>, 
	PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1144281e6e5f250525fd5e33
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 7.0.0 final RTM delay
From: tyra3l@gmail.com (Ferenc Kovacs)

--001a1144281e6e5f250525fd5e33
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Fran=C3=A7ois Laupretre <francois@php.net>
wrote:

>
>
> Le 03/12/2015 11:17, Pierre Joye a =C3=A9crit :
>
>> The releases must be kept on hold until these binaries (and other are
>> done in the same time btw) are validated. See it as part of the QA. As R=
emi
>> mentioned, many issues have be caught during this process. If it was onl=
y
>> about delivering binaries, a day later will never be a problem. But it i=
s
>> not the case. The case we are referring toi is to avoid to have to do a
>> fast patch release to work around an issue we could have seen by validat=
ing
>> the binaries.Simple.
>>
>
> I understand your pov and I agree that windows binaries should be ready
> when announcing the release. But, IMO, everything should have been 'froze=
n'
> 2 or 3 days ago and a new openssl release or any other 3rd party software=
,
> even tagged 'security fixes' shouldn't have disturbed the process. Or the
> change is hot enough to delay the date again, but that's another process.
>
> Sorry to say that, as it doesn't remove anything to my respect for the
> huge work you did, but It's now Dec, 4th in more and more locations in th=
e
> world and PHP 7 is not released yet ! Zeev is right, nobody cares about U=
TC
> in such case.


Yeah, and if we released a couple of hours ago there would be places where
it was still dec 2.
I can remember at least 3 similar occasion when an openssl release was
coming the same day as our release and we have always waited for the
windows builds, I don't even remember any arguments about that.
As others mentioned waiting for the windows builds are not mandatory, so if
the windows build team would be slacking off or going MIA we could just
ignore it and push the release, but I don't think that the current
situation would warrant ignoring our standard procedure used for years.

my two cents.

--=20
Ferenc Kov=C3=A1cs
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu

--001a1144281e6e5f250525fd5e33--