Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:36:38 +0100 From: endzed@gmail.com To: FreeBSD-Ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: PHP 5.4.0 : lang/php54 Message-ID: <1018A8F3-A4E6-468C-8097-E60349E121F5@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4F5E0192.8000301@quip.cz> References: <CAERaTk--Qb4ez2qYOjk51qws_2G0jcj4qZLGdeY-nZV1C3jjHA@mail.gmail.com> <201203112026.30630.subbsd@gmail.com> <4F5DB7C7.6090308@FreeBSD.org> <4F5DE9DC.8050005@quip.cz> <20120312093126.4420939f@scorpio> <4F5E0192.8000301@quip.cz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Le 12 mars 2012 =E0 15:00, Miroslav Lachman a =E9crit : > Jerry wrote: >> On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 13:19:40 +0100 >> Miroslav Lachman articulated: >>=20 >>> I really understand that you don't have a time or will to maintain >>> more than 1 version of PHP - it is not an easy task. But what is the >>> difference between more versions of PHP in the ports tree and more >>> versions of Python, Perl, MySQL, Postgresql, Postfix... and many = more >>> ports? There is always some reason why they are there. >>> Some of them (Perl 5.8 comes to my mind) are/were in the tree for a >>> long time after upstream EOL. >>>=20 >>> Personally - I don't need older PHP versions for webaplications >>> written by my-self, but there are many hosted websites depending on >>> an older versions on our webhosting servers. Customers must wait for >>> update from their vedors etc. Even some mainstream Open Source CMS >>> and other applications lags behind PHP development. >>=20 >> The primary reason that so many older/EOL'd versions of programs are >> still in existence is because by nature most individuals are just = plain >> lazy. Face it, man only invented electricity because watching TV by >> candle light was not very convenient. >>=20 >> Seriously though, all too many users have to be dragged into the = future >> or else they will just rot in the past. If support for EOL'd crap was >> implemented immediately, support for the newer versions would be >> instituted lickety-split. >=20 > It is not about EoL in the first place. PHP 5.3 is still maintained = branch by vendor. > And if we are talking about more than one branch... FreeBSD exists in = 3 parallel branches + HEAD. Plus this way of thinking does not let place for inertia of big = projects. Especially collaborative projects where you can have thousand = of developers btw. You cannot ask all projects/piece of code to be ready = to upgrade to new version at the same time, and I'm not speaking of = projects that involve many other technologies than PHP. Some projects = simply cannot follow the vendor versioning rate just because of inertia, = just to say. Maybe this could also be a way to go here at some point, I = cannot tell. Anyway I think that the steps of launching a new port/port usage/port = deprecation is necessary for this exact reason. The other way would be = to freeze all the tree from time to time (i.e. several months) and ask = projects maintainers/developers to stick to each freeze. FreeBSD system = do that, but in userland it is imho not possible due to the big amount = of ports available, dependencies, conflicts, etc. But as I said, this is only my point of view, we will conform to any = change since we have not enough ressources to handle or maintain a port = like PHP. For the moment, I can say that this is not a lazy task when = you have tens of servers to maintain, and this is why I started to post = in this thread... >=20 > Miroslav Lachman > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to = "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1018A8F3-A4E6-468C-8097-E60349E121F5>