Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:89719 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 54294 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2015 15:57:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 7 Dec 2015 15:57:26 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=rowan.collins@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=rowan.collins@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.47 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: rowan.collins@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 74.125.82.47 mail-wm0-f47.google.com Received: from [74.125.82.47] ([74.125.82.47:34463] helo=mail-wm0-f47.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 7A/15-28320-56CA5665 for ; Mon, 07 Dec 2015 10:57:26 -0500 Received: by wmvv187 with SMTP id v187so173282097wmv.1 for ; Mon, 07 Dec 2015 07:57:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=m75CIZFZqGeHbnUHYw5Q9pIJVFv5Zk3EvqpEvcb0zNA=; b=yyajw1m0YTtGL9W8OzjqX2L9tWEWDuMDjAc1JSxGimPmzP4+ERIq+GxoY622PfenXF il75ufqulREJDzWgPiZB4ryUy7CPY/cD+BFTBBPPMcYbOteARBHNmqvGhhoJE/h1vSl1 fhCs+HVAOtKCr6Yvw8j/1ikneYXd9Jl+4BbMJDlWTfbCZcjlTHXZlOT1M32r2qS8cfD9 h/hAihXC1Fm/OafnojyLmvnQrTNOjDjiwtEljmSUP6aNFdaXzSItkJLH5LVUh6PIQgXk rljqeSwaBsvkv3N/IE2pU3cIsMjc51yZVJsN3hva58VQd7ZL44XLbBZUHg+7r8rpY1WL 3wNg== X-Received: by 10.28.19.84 with SMTP id 81mr23321604wmt.26.1449503842362; Mon, 07 Dec 2015 07:57:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.137] ([93.188.182.58]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id dl8sm25893793wjb.29.2015.12.07.07.57.21 for (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 07 Dec 2015 07:57:21 -0800 (PST) To: internals@lists.php.net References: <11.24.55814.5A495665@pb1.pair.com> <56659949.8080405@gmail.com> <56659ABA.5010708@gmail.com> <2972914fdd1182ecf20d4c1cbd9b2c55@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <5665AC28.70205@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 15:56:24 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2972914fdd1182ecf20d4c1cbd9b2c55@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: PHP 5.6 life cycle From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Collins) Zeev Suraski wrote on 07/12/2015 15:11: > It's always possible to submit another RFC to alter the end date, even if > we decide about one now. But I do think it'll send a different message - > that we think it's going to take extraordinary circumstances for us to > change the decision - vs. us saying "we'll wait and see", which at least I > would interpret as "they'll probably delay it". Yeah, that's absolutely my view. As with the 7.0 timeline and 5.7 (non-)existence, a formal RFC stating the position ends speculation and allows everyone to make clear plans. If there is a strong view that more evidence will be available in 6 months time, a short RFC now stating the date and criteria for a final decision will allow us to short-cut part of the discussion next time. But unless someone can name the specific information they're waiting for, it's no easier to name the decision date than the EOL date itself, so we're better off just making a firm decision now. Regards, -- Rowan Collins [IMSoP]