On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Nikita Popov <nikita....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Ferenc Kovacs <tyr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 2015. dec. 6. 13:15 ezt írta ("Jan Ehrhardt" <php...@ehrhardt.nl>):
>> >
>> > See http://php.net/supported-versions.php
>> >
>> > Will PHP 5.6 go into 'security fixes only' on 28 Aug 2015 with a end of
>> > life on 28 Aug 2016? Or will we be postponing this a couple of months?
>> >
>> > BTW: An end-of-life in Dec 2016 will be in line wih the EOL of OpenSSL
>> > 1.0.1: "Version 1.0.1 will be supported until 2016-12-31."
>> > http://openssl.org/policies/releasestrat.html
>> > --
>> > Jan
>> >
>> > --
>> > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>> > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>> >
>>
>> Since the rfc for 5.7 failed the voting I've personally assumed that we
>> don't want to support the 5.x series after the normal lifecycle for 5.6:
>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/php57
>>
>> Most of my arguments for 5.7 was the same as Zeev and orhers listed here
>> in
>> this thread but the majority shared the opinion that the support left for
>> 5.6 is sufficient and we shouldn't prolong the support for 5.x as it will
>> just delay the adoption for 7.0
>>
>
> I can't say anything as to what majorities think, but while I did not want
> a PHP 5.7 release, with the large amount of additional work and
> fragmentation of focus it would have implied, this does not make me adverse
> to extending the PHP 5.6 support cycle. I would go as far as saying that us
> not having done a PHP 5.7 release is an argument in favor of prolonging
> support for PHP 5.6, not the reverse.
>
> Nikita
>
re-reading the archives I tend to agree, even myself mentioned in the 5.7
thread that we could extend the 5.6 lifecycle if the sole reason for 5.7
was to extend the support timeframe for 5.x
so I think that extending the 5.6 lifecycle is fair game, but I think it
would be better to not decide about that now, but wait a bit and see how
the php7 adoption goes first and we can make a more data-based decision
later.
(obviously this would require an RFC and a vote)
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
