Frankly, I think the LTS distros that include PHP 5.6 will be plenty — as we've seen with 5.3, it has been maintained with back ports long after the official EOL.
People either understand what they're getting into when making these choices, or they don't and they don't care anyway. I'd vote +1 on 2b. On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 7:07 PM, Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com> wrote: > hi, > > On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 2:51 AM, Adam Howard <oldschool...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > #3 all the way. Extending support only extends the excuse of poor habits > > and encourages those habits. > > Same here. > > However, if I have to choose something I would like to understand why > all of a sudden December 31 become a valid date. It is unrelated to 7 > release date (December 3rd) and has no relevance whatsoever but easier > to remember. > > Given this, I would propose to either add, change or update the options > with: > > - makes 5.6 deadlines match 7 release date and support lifetime > . Active support until December 3rd 2017, > . Active support extended to one year, end December 3rd, 2017 > . And the options for the security support, one or two years > > - no change, as stick to what we clearly and openly define in the > lifecycle page (http://php.net/supported-versions.php) and extend > security support to 2 years (ending on 28 Aug 2018) > > I had to go with make the dates match with no change, eventually > adding one year for security support as I consider extending the > active support at this stage as a mistake and bad usage of our limited > resources. > > Cheers, > -- > Pierre > > @pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >
