On Sep 26, 5:03 pm, "Francois Zaninotto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] project.com> 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. > > 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. >
I don't think the changes you listed deserve to be summarized as Symfony 2.0; they simply mean improved functionality and/or refactoring of what's already in 1.0. Hence, it should be called 1.1 (or 1.2 if you choose to give development branches odd numbers). The day Symfony gets a new, written from scratch forefront feature of any web framework - form validation/update, making it *useful* and *enjoyable*, - definitely not what it has now - then it should definitely be Symfony 2.0. Until then, it's too early. If you're simply choosing a release number for marketing purposes, then call it 2.0 up to 10.0 or 20.0 like Solaris or Emacs did (not at all meaning they have bad software). --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
