Francois Zaninotto wrote: > 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 > > > > I also think 1.5 is the best compromise (as much as I have a say, of course ;))
Kupo --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
