That is true. But I am glad that I don't have to build my own php rpms anymore :-)
Christof On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 15:45, Tom Boutell<[email protected]> wrote: > > Yes that's true, and I'm pleased to hear it and looking forward to > 5.3.1. But the larger message about the Remi repository is that it > doesn't shy away from unstable stuff (will this happen with PHP 6.0 > too? Probably), so it's not a good solution for a client that is > currently using a distribution that is TOO conservative (CentOS/RHEL). > (: > > On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Oz Basarir<[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Just an FYI: Looks like this bug has been fixed. Here is a copy/paste from >> that link: >> >> ----------------------------------- >> [31 Jul 9:10pm UTC] [email protected] >> This bug has been fixed in SVN. >> >> Snapshots of the sources are packaged every three hours; this change >> will be in the next snapshot. You can grab the snapshot at >> http://snaps.php.net/. >> >> Thank you for the report, and for helping us make PHP better. >> ----------------------------------- >> >> >> >> >> On 8/13/09 5:53 AM, "Tom Boutell" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> My first thought here: PHP 5.3.0? PHP 5.3.0 has important features >>> (circular garbage collection! At last!) but it also has some huge >>> showstopper bugs for production use right now. We were bitten by this >>> one right off the bat when a client tried it: >>> >>> http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=48880 >>> >>> They rolled right back to 5.2.6 after fifteen minutes of PHP Apache >>> processes quickly going bad and getting stuck in "white page of death" >>> mode. Ouch. Now we're working on them to move to 5.2.10. >>> >>> There's a balance of stability and current-ness to be found out >>> there... currently it seems to be called "Ubuntu," but we can't >>> necessarily make everyone migrate to Ubuntu, much as we would like to. >>> (: >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 3:47 AM, cdamian<[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> We are using the PHP and MySQL RPMs from the Remi Repository, he is >>>> currently providing PHP 5.3.0 for RHEL and Fedora. >>>> >>>> Christof >>>> >>>> On Aug 9, 5:18 pm, Tom Boutell <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> One of our major clients has moved to building PHP 5.2.x in-house in >>>>> order to accommodate Symfony 1.2, but for others it remains an >>>>> insurmountable obstacle. >>>>> >>>>> I think community support is a good solution as long as the community >>>>> is allowed to do that on the main symfony trac and using the main >>>>> symfony ticketing system, which are crucial for practical acceptance I >>>>> think. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 5:39 AM, Olivier LOYNET<[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>>> That why we are going to migrate all our mains servers from RHEL to >>>>>> Ubuntu >>>>>> because they release a stable version every 6 month to match the IT >>>>>> market >>>>>> needs. Why to stay with symfony 1.0 applications when you have so much >>>>>> new >>>>>> functionnalities in 1.2 and soon in 1.3. >>>>> >>>>>> Olivier >>>>>> http://www.la-souris-verte.com/ >>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: [email protected] >>>>>>> [mailto:[email protected]] >>>>>>> On Behalf Of Nicolas Perriault >>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 11:21 AM >>>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>>> Subject: [symfony-devs] Re: Dovetailing the end of Symfony 1.0 support >>>>>>> with RHEL6 >>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Tom Boutell<[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>> right now I'm making the case that ending support for PHP 5.1.x while >>>>>>>> it is still in wide deployment in a major linux distribution with no >>>>>>>> upgrade yet available in that distribution just doesn't look good >>>>>>>> (...) it's bad marketing for Symfony >>>>> >>>>>>> Frankly, maintaining a 3yo+ version of a Web framework just to please >>>>>>> users of one distribution, even a widely (not wisely) adopted one, is >>>>>>> just too much time-consumming just for marketing purpose. We should >>>>>>> talk about RHEL/CentOS marketing strategy instead ;) >>>>> >>>>>>> I'm all with the idea of Stefan of putting 1.0 branch maintenance into >>>>>>> the hands of the community. That's how it works in a lot of other oss >>>>>>> projects, and furthermore not that much can pretend offering official >>>>>>> 3 years long term support as with Symfony. >>>>> >>>>>>> Just my two cents >>>>> >>>>>>> ++ >>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Nicolas Perriault >>>>>>> http://prendreuncafe.com-http://symfonians.net >>>>>>> Mobile: +33 660 92 08 67 >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Tom Boutell >>>>> P'unk Avenue >>>>> 215 755 1330 >>>>> punkave.com >>>>> window.punkave.com >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > >> > > > > -- > Tom Boutell > P'unk Avenue > 215 755 1330 > punkave.com > window.punkave.com > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
