I'm top-posting, as this is the original email, and there are points throughout the thread I want to respond to.
First off, I'm sorry for the delay in my response -- I've been on vacation, and completely offline for all but one day of it. :) Ralf Eggert's idea of aggregating the various "2.0" component pages with an "index" page is one I'll put into action this week, as well as start aggregating notes I've been making on plans for 2.0 (some of which are public, others of which are not). As Ralph Schindler noted, 2.0 will be a long path, for a variety of reasons. Yes, distro support is definitely one criteria, but only one. As noted, we've already decided that RHEL's LTS cycle is ridiculously long (a sentiment echoed by developers from other frameworks as well), and waiting for it would unduly hamper innovation on part. Additionally (/me puts on Zend hat here), with supported platforms such as Zend Server now available, we can be a bit more aggressive with our versioning than we have been in the past. Will 2.0 be PHP 5.3 and above only? Most likely. As noted by a number of you, there are some very compelling features in PHP 5.3, particularly when it comes to framework developers, and I think we'd be remiss not to use them. However, we need to evaluate each component and determine what if any features they could use, and how we might best make use of those features. Some that we know already we'll be using: namespaces, closures, and __invoke(). These can make a variety of features much easier and simpler, and make the syntax more succinct, particularly for plugins. Other considerations, as Ralph also noted, will come from what we've learned in the 1.x series, as well as from other frameworks (both PHP and otherwise). One thing I've learned from Dojo, for instance, is the importance and simplicity of a common API, and we've been moving toward this in recent versions with the introduction of common constructor paradigms (passing an options array or Zend_Config object to constructors). We'll likely be doing some refactoring to make this a common strategy throughout the framework. Another consideration we have is migration. Because we'll be breaking backwards compatibility (which is typical of a major release), we want to ensure that developers have an easy way to move to the newer versions so we don't have to maintain the 1.x branch indefinitely. If we do not, the success of the project will be rocky, as we'll have some people staying with the 1.x branch, and others with 2.x. All of these factors add to the amount of time it will take to get to 2.0. In the meantime, we will still be working on 1.X -- expect a 1.10 before the year is out, and potentially one or more versions after that. -- admirau <[email protected]> wrote (on Sunday, 09 August 2009, 06:48 AM -0700): > > Are there any known plans for ZF 2.0? > It will be an 'regular' release? Are planned any 'breaktrough' features > (e.g. application backend like in Symfony, ORM)? > > I'm sure, it will be backwards compatilble, > but what can we expect? > > I've found only this roadmap for Zend_Controller: > http://framework.zend.com/wiki/display/ZFDEV/Zend_Controller+2.0 -- Matthew Weier O'Phinney Project Lead | [email protected] Zend Framework | http://framework.zend.com/
