> -Original Message-
> From: yohg...@gmail.com [mailto:yohg...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Yasuo
> Ohgaki
> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 2:08 AM
> To: internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: PHP 5.6 life cycle
>
> Upgrading extensions from PHP 5.X to
Hi all,
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>
>> Furthermore, postponing EOL now means reduced pressure to upgrade to 7.
>
> Again, if you think people's decision to upgrade significantly depends
> on that, I think you are deluding yourself. We have tons of "pressure"
> to
On 14/12/15 23:43, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> I'm not sure what you mean here by "should be". If you mean "if
> everybody dropped everything right now and started only working on
> upgrade to PHP 7 then they could make it in 20 months" - yes, it is
> reasonably true. But nobody would do that. In f
Hi!
> That means 5.6 EOL is 20 months and 11 days away. That's more than one
> and a half years, it should be enough time to upgrade.
I'm not sure what you mean here by "should be". If you mean "if
everybody dropped everything right now and started only working on
upgrade to PHP 7 then they could
Den 2015-12-07 kl. 16:57, skrev Zeev Suraski:
-Original Message-
From: Arvids Godjuks [mailto:arvids.godj...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 5:52 PM
To: Zeev Suraski
Cc: Rowan Collins; PHP internals
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: PHP 5.6 life cycle
According to PHP release RFC
This is the current official timeline
http://php.net/supported-versions.php
I personally think it is long enough and would actually suggestion
shortening it (2016, not 2017). Extended the timeline would only further
influence people not to upgrade, as an excuse that it was still supported.
On Mo
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 "
> -Original Message-
> From: Arvids Godjuks [mailto:arvids.godj...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 5:52 PM
> To: Zeev Suraski
> Cc: Rowan Collins; PHP internals
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: PHP 5.6 life cycle
>
> According to PHP release RFC - the
2015-12-07 17:11 GMT+02:00 Zeev Suraski :
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Rowan Collins [mailto:rowan.coll...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 4:42 PM
> > To: internals@lists.php.net
> > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: PHP 5.6 life cycle
> >
&
> -Original Message-
> From: Rowan Collins [mailto:rowan.coll...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 4:42 PM
> To: internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: PHP 5.6 life cycle
>
> Rowan Collins wrote on 07/12/2015 14:35:
> > - On what factors
On 07/12/15 14:42, Rowan Collins wrote:
> Rowan Collins wrote on 07/12/2015 14:35:
>> - On what factors will the decision be based? If the reason to delay
>> the decision is lack of information, what information are we planning
>> to use? Are there metrics we can use to make a more objective decisi
OS's (CentOS/Debian) for example do offer official upgrade paths via their
own repositories and 3rd party repositories. However has history has shown
extended support only extends the resistance to update those paths, Alain
Williams
While the PHP Development Team obviously cannot control the acti
Rowan Collins wrote on 07/12/2015 14:35:
- On what factors will the decision be based? If the reason to delay
the decision is lack of information, what information are we planning
to use? Are there metrics we can use to make a more objective decision?
Come to think, this works the other way a
Sebastian Bergmann wrote on 07/12/2015 14:28:
Exactly. We need a fixed EOL date and we need it now. And before this
thread started we had one: August 2017.
To be fair, it wouldn't have taken a psychic to predict that this would
be at least discussed. Until now, there has never actually been a
Andrea Faulds wrote on 07/12/2015 14:16:
Furthermore, postponing EOL now means reduced pressure to upgrade to
7. If people feel they do not have to move any time soon, perhaps they
won't.
So, I wonder if it would not be better to wait until nearer the
deadline, and see if we need an extension
Am 07.12.2015 um 15:25 schrieb Levi Morrison:
>> So, I wonder if it would not be better to wait until nearer the deadline,
>> and see if we need an extension then?
>
> This is exactly the strategy that at least a few others in this thread
> aside from myself are advocating against. Please let's ju
> So, I wonder if it would not be better to wait until nearer the deadline,
> and see if we need an extension then?
This is exactly the strategy that at least a few others in this thread
aside from myself are advocating against. Please let's just pick an
EOL date and stick to it. By planning to re
Hi,
Jan Ehrhardt wrote:
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?
As others have pointed out, you made a typo.
PHP 5.6 goes into 'security fixes only'
Jan Ehrhardt in php.internals (Sun, 06 Dec 2015 13:14:57 +0100):
>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?
Oops. Corrected:
Will PHP 5.6 go into 'secu
19 matches
Mail list logo
