"As the so-called "Symfony 1.1" is not a revolution of Symfony's core"
This is quite the contrary. A LOT has changed in the core but users won't have to change a lot of things in their applications to make it work with symfony 1.1 (most of the changes are automated by the symfony project:upgrade task anyway). But, you're also right, because this new release works with the same logic as far as the controller/filters/... works. So, no major changes here. symfony 2.0 will have major changes in the way we implement the Controller pattern (see my symfonyCamp presentation for more information). Here is another major reason why I think 1.5 is good compromise: - we are committed to provide support for symfony 1.0 - symfony 1.1/1.5/whatever is "just" a transition release (like 0.6.3 in the past) - symfony 2.0 will be a release that will be supported for a long period of time. Fabien Xavier Lacot wrote: > Hi François, > > I fully agree with you, even though I fear that some people might be > frightened of BC breaks. Wouldn't a version called "1.5" be a good > compromise ? Other successful open-source projects have used this number > for major improvements (Mozilla Firefox, for instance). As the so-called > "Symfony 1.1" is not a revolution of Symfony's core, keeping the major > number "1" sounds to me the best solution. > > xavier > > Francois Zaninotto a écrit : >> Hi list, >> >> When I look at the trunk version of symfony, I see a lot of new and >> exciting stuff, among which: >> >> - New CLI task system >> - New plugin system >> - New mixin/event system >> - Improved caching system >> - Total decoupling of objects >> - Better exceptions >> - Better routing >> - Better logging >> - Better storage >> - More factories >> - Less singletons >> - I probably forgot some >> - And many, many small improvements. >> >> All in all, the question about symfony 1.1 is more "what hasn't changed" >> rather that "what has changed". The best part is that all that has >> changed almost never breaks BC, which means that existing applications >> will most of the time be able to take advantage of the new features. >> >> This leads me to a marketing concern: Should we call the next release >> "symfony 1.1" or "symfony 2.0"? With all the new stuff in there, calling >> it 1.1 would really be a poor choice (especially if you compare it with >> what rails put in its 1.1...), spoiling the enhancements. On the other >> hand, calling it symfony 2.0 might frighten people, especially BC wise. >> >> We know Fabien has great plans for after this next release, but their >> version number could very well be 3.0 or 4.0. >> >> Last but not least, symfony 1.0 was released eight months ago, and no >> enhancement was officially published since then. I think symfony >> deserves a strong version upgrade to show that the development is very >> active. >> >> What are your thoughts on the subject? >> >> François > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "symfony developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/symfony-devs?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
