Re: [RFC] discussions, about a 5.3 EOL

hi Sebastian, Thing is that we already have well defined lifecycle for anything after 5.4. So the question is only about 5.3. That's why, given that it is already a couple of years old, I would rather go with a statically defined EOL now. As php-next is very unlikely to be the moment where people will suddenly migrate. For any future release, it is static, release date + three years. On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Sebastian Bergmann <sebastian@php.net> wrote: > On 03/02/2012 10:54 AM, Pierre Joye wrote: >> >> And when do you think it is one year after php-next? In two years. So >> much about one year being the only option ;-) > > >  I am capable of learning, but that's besides the point. The point is >  static (two years after release) vs. dynamic (one year after next >  release). In a perfect world those two are the same. > > > -- > Sebastian Bergmann                    Co-Founder and Principal Consultant > http://sebastian-bergmann.de/                       >     http://thePHP.cc/ > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org