Hey Fabien, The release approach seems indeed good way to move forward. However if you would want to have symfony2 being used in a more enterprise enviroment I'm afraid that 3 years of LTS isn't enough. Especially because they are not always in the driving seat to keep up with releases. I know that for most web projects 3 years a long time, but it isn't in the enterprise world. Especially if already takes sometimes one year to deliver a project.
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Javier Eguiluz <javier.egui...@gmail.com>wrote: > Fabien, thank you for sharing the proposal of the new realease process and > for making it debatable. > > In my opinion, the proposed changes are great and they will improve the > quality of Symfony and its ecosystem. > > The only drawback I see is the new set of pull request rules. I think that > sticking to those rules would be awesome ... but a bit unrealistic. > Documenting every change (even if you don't know if it's going to be > accepted), updating changelog and UPGRADE, adding tests for all supported > PHP versions, etc. for every single code change is so cumbersome that most > people don't do it even for their own projects. > > -- > Javier Eguiluz > www.symfony.es > > On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 7:01 AM, Fabien Potencier < > fabien.potenc...@symfony-project.com> wrote: > >> My keynote last week at Symfony Live London was about adopting a formal >> release process. In fact, I've talked about adopting a shorter release >> cycle for Symfony for quite some time now, and I think that this is the >> right time to discuss it. >> >> As we have all noticed, Symfony enjoys a large community of "core" >> developers: a core developer being someone who contribute to Symfony on a >> regular basis. The flow of pull requests has been outstanding and steady >> for the past two years, and with such an activity, trying to release often >> without a clear roadmap is quite difficult. Adopting a more formal release >> cycle will also give more visibility to the contributors and allow for >> everyone to understand when a new feature might be available in Symfony. >> >> So, here is my initial proposal, which is the one I've talked about >> during Symfony Live and of course, it is up for discussion. I would like to >> apply the new release process as soon as possible and if possible for >> Symfony 2.2. And whenever we all agree on the final version of this >> proposal, it will be included in the official Symfony documentation. >> >> This release process only applies to the code hosted on the >> symfony/symfony repository, but of course, I hope that third-party code >> related to Symfony (like the Symfony bundles) will also adopt it (at least, >> just for the timeline). >> >> Let's list the goals for the new process: >> >> * Shorten the release cycle; >> >> * Keep backward compatibility as much as possible; >> >> * Enhance the overall quality of the framework (not just the code, but >> documentation, bundles, ...); >> >> * Give more visibility to our "customers": developers using the >> framework to get their job done and Open-Soure projects using/embedding >> Symfony; >> >> * Improve the experience of Symfony core contributors by controlling the >> flow of incoming pull requests (why pull requests are not always merged >> right away? when will a new feature be merged? when breaking BC is >> acceptable? ...); >> >> * Coordinate our timeline with projects that we are using (Doctrine, >> Propel, Monolog, Assetic, Twig, ...) but also with projects that are >> using/embedding Symfony; >> >> * Give time to the Symfony ecosystem to catch up with the new versions >> (bundleauthors, documentation writers, translators, ...); >> * Allow developers to benefit from the new features faster. >> >> That's a lot to take care of! >> >> So, without further ado, here is my plan. >> >> Timeline >> -------- >> >> Historically, we've been able to release a new major version every year >> since 2005. Nothing was even written about that, but that's what we did. >> >> From now on, I propose to adopt a *time-based model* for Symfony and I >> think that having a new major release every six months is a good >> compromise: it gives plenty of time to work on new features but it also >> allows for non-ready features to be postponed to the next version (without >> having to wait too much for the next cycle). >> >> Six months should be fast enough for developers who want to work on the >> latest and the greatest; but at the same time, companies might want more >> time to learn and upgrade. The way to make everyone happy is to ensure an >> easy upgrade path from one version to the next one. Take Twig as an >> example: I've been able to release a new major version every month and a >> half since 1.0; that's very fast and it has been possible because we've >> kept backward compatibility between all major releases (and of course the >> scope of Twig is also smaller). >> >> Six month releases mean that two releases fit in a year and so, everybody >> knows when releases will be made without having to check on the website: >> for Symfony it will be at the end of May and at the end of November of each >> year. That brings predictability and visibility. >> >> The key is keeping backward compatibility. We must be much more careful >> when breaking backward compatibility; and the possibility to break backward >> compatibility depends on the component we are talking about. The following >> components must never break backward compatibility because they are the >> low-level architecture of the framework and also because so many people >> rely on them: >> >> * ClassLoader >> * Console >> * DependencyInjection >> * EventDispatcher >> * HttpFoundation >> * HttpKernel >> * Routing >> >> Backward compatibility should be easy to keep for the following >> components: >> >> * BrowserKit >> * CssSelector >> * DomCrawler >> * Filesystem >> * Finder >> * Locale >> * OptionsResolver >> * Process >> * Templating >> * Yaml >> >> And these components should probably become more stable soon, but that's >> not that easy (yet): >> >> * Config >> * Form >> * Security >> * Serializer >> * Translation >> * Validator >> >> Six months can be seen as a rather short period to make a new release, >> especially if we look at what we did in the past. I think we can make it >> work because we have now more people able to help, but also because the six >> month period itself should be cut in shorter periods: >> >> * Development: 4 months to add new features and to enhance existing ones; >> >> * Stabilisation: 2 months to fix bugs, prepare the release, and wait for >> the whole ecosystem to catch up. >> >> During the development phase, we can revert any new feature if we think >> that we won't be able to finish it in time or if we think that it won't be >> stable enough to be included. >> >> During the stabilisation phase, some developers might still work on new >> features for the next version, but it would be better if most developers >> can concentrate on finishing the current version. >> >> By the way, when I have a look at the pull requests today, I think that >> we already have enough features for Symfony 2.2. >> >> Long Term Support release >> ------------------------- >> >> We've not yet published our LTS release for Symfony2. As I mentioned it >> in the past, the first LTS should be Symfony 2.3. >> >> Each LTS release will be supported for a 3 year period but it will also >> be supported for at least a year after the next LTS is released. So, it >> means that we are going to release a new LTS version every two years. >> >> This dual release cycle should make everyone happy. If you are a fast >> mover, you want to work with the latest and the greatest, stick with the >> standard support releases: you have a new version every six months, and you >> have two months to upgrade to the next one. If you are a big company, and >> you want more stability, stick with the long term support releases: you get >> a new version every two years and you have a year to upgrade. >> >> Schedule >> -------- >> >> To make things more concrete, here is the schedule for the next few >> versions: >> >> * Symfony 2.2 will be released at the end of February 2013; >> >> * Symfony 2.3 (the first LTS) will be released at the end of Mai 2013 >> (only 3 months after 2.2 as it will be a "special" release in the sense >> that we will mainly remove the 2.0 BC layer and also because I think that >> May and November are the best months for releases); >> >> * Symfony 2.4 will be released at the end of November 2013; >> >> * Symfony 2.5 will be released at the end of Mai 2014; >> >> * ... >> >> So, why not releasing Symfony 2.2 earlier as we already have so many >> features waiting in the pull request queue? Because of the next section: >> this is our last chance to break backward compatibility. >> >> Symfony 3.0 >> ----------- >> >> After the release of Symfony 2.3, backward compatibility will be kept at >> all cost. If it is not possible, the feature/enhancement will be scheduled >> for Symfony 3.0. And the work on 3.0 will start whenever we think that we >> have enough great features under our belt to make it worth it. >> >> Maintenance >> ----------- >> >> After Symfony 2.3, non LTS releases will be maintained for 8 months to >> give people plenty of time to upgrade (keep in mind that even if no BC >> breaks will have occurred, you might need to upgrade your applications to >> benefit from the new features and the new best practices). >> >> Contributions >> ------------- >> >> To make the new process works well (no BC and a fixed schedule), we need >> to formalise the contribution process a bit more. Every new Symfony feature >> or enhancement must be worked on via Git pull requests. A few months ago, >> we formalised the pull request process a bit by adding a required [header]( >> http://symfony.com/**doc/current/contributing/code/** >> patches.html#make-a-pull-**request)/check<http://symfony.com/doc/current/contributing/code/patches.html#make-a-pull-request)/check>list. >> But I've done a poor job in enforcing the rule. So, I'm going to be >> uncompromising about it now and at the same time I'd like to introduce even >> more checks in the list. >> >> A pull request will only be merged if the following rules are met: >> >> * The code is correct and it uses the Symfony way of doing things >> (naming conventions, coding standards, ...); >> >> * The new code is tested (or the bug to fix is covered by tests) and all >> the tests pass on all supported PHP versions; >> >> * The documentation has been updated (with a pending pull request on >> symfony/symfony-docs); >> >> * The changelog and upgrade files have been updated; >> >> * No backward compatibility break has been introduced; >> >> * If it is a fix, it has been applied to the oldest and still supported >> Symfony version; >> >> * For major features, a RFC has been written, discussed, and approved. >> >> As I said at the beginning, this is a draft, and you are all welcome to >> chime in and propose changes. >> >> >> -- >> Fabien Potencier >> Sensio CEO - Symfony lead developer >> sensiolabs.com | symfony.com | fabien.potencier.org >> Tél: +33 1 40 99 80 80 >> >> -- >> If you want to report a vulnerability issue on symfony, please send it to >> security at symfony-project.com >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "symfony developers" group. >> To post to this group, send email to symfony-devs@googlegroups.com >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> symfony-devs+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<symfony-devs%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/**group/symfony-devs?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/symfony-devs?hl=en> >> > > -- > If you want to report a vulnerability issue on symfony, please send it to > security at symfony-project.com > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "symfony developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to symfony-devs@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > symfony-devs+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/symfony-devs?hl=en > -- If you want to report a vulnerability issue on symfony, please send it to security at symfony-project.com You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "symfony developers" group. To post to this group, send email to symfony-devs@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to symfony-devs+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/symfony-devs?hl=en
