[wp-hackers] Not willing to summon the ancient troll, but... PHP5 in WP 3.0 ?

[Shane A. Froebel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Well..... I would say 3.0 is a major release from the stand point of
possibility that it might be PHP5.

Mark and I were talking at WordCamp NYC (and I think I brought this up a
number of times) that PHP4 is around 10.6% -- not the 14% Matt said on
stage. If we are only .6% points (0./% points for those wanting it to be
below 10%) it might very well happen during the time we are developing
the merge of MU and Stand-alone WordPress in one package.

Mark will chime in once he's all rested up, but I don't have access tot
he real numbers. Clarity will show.

Anyway, back to 2.9 bug hunting. :)

Your Friend,
Shane

Ken Newman wrote:
> On 11/16/2009 4:18 PM, Demetris wrote:
>> Not that it matters, but I am with Matt on this.  The WP versioning
>> scheme is a good self-restraint;  it does not leave you any room to
>> play games with numbers.  (Or we could end up doing it like Google. We
>> have barely seen their browser yet, and it is already on version 4!)
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>> Demetris
>> http://op111.net/
>> _______________________________________________
>> wp-hackers mailing list
>> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
>> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
>>    
> I think there's something to be said of doing it the other way. A 3.0
> release being a "Major" release would allow for major changes that a
> limited number of users may not be ready for, like PHP 5 support and
> removing PHP 4 backporting. Like wise, removing depreciated functions,
> code rewrites, re factoring, and abstractions could be done with less
> disruption on a real full major release because its expected for major
> releases. Going forward, and for a limited time, there would be support
> for 2.9.1, or 2.10 etc for security updates, and those users would have
> to eventually upgrade before support ended. Maintaining two branches
> (one only for security), but for a relatively short term wouldn't be too
> onerous would it? It seems to work for most projects, though I may be
> missing something here.
> _______________________________________________
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
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=BqSZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----