Hi, 2012/9/17 Daniel Kucharski <inspi...@gmail.com>: > 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.
It's true. Enterprise is a specific world. Do you think that there is a demand for a distribution with longer time support? > > 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 >>> 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+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 > > > -- > 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 -- Best regards, Michal http://eventhorizon.pl/ https://getactive.pl/ -- 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
