I agree. I personally would have loved the choice between supported php4 and
php5 for TSL 2.2, or even better, coexistence of both if that were at all
possible. I would really just prefer to not spend the time to do extensive
testing of all my web applications to ensure that they do indeed work in all
scenarios.

I find the exclusive jump to php5 quite strange, given the normal Trustix
policy of not jumping onboard the latest greatest things, for example not
using the 2.6 kernel in TSL 2.2. I would have thought that the Trustix
developers would err on the side of caution and if at all supporting php5,
at the least provide support for both versions. Especially since 2.2 is the
final release of a series that has always supported php4.

Maybe the Trustix development team doesn't consider the php4->php5 migration
as a major thing, but as a full time php developer I seriously do. Sure,
people say 99% of scripts will simply work .. but what about that 1% that
wont. What percentage of people would have been adversely effected by a
kernel change to 2.6? I've always respected the TSL policy of stability
first, but in my humble opinion it hasn't strictly been followed in this
instance.

Regards,
David Hogan

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Barbara M.
Sent: Thursday, 31 March 2005 7:50 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: TSL 2.1 End of Life?

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Christian Haugan Toldnes wrote:

> (Mar 30 2005 17:50) William Kern wrote:
> > When is the scheduled EOL for TSL 2.1
> 
> If I remember correctly it is six -6- months after release of 2.2, which
> would mean May 8. 2005.


The great enhancement due to introduction of php5, pgsql8, ... don't
giustify a delayed EOL?  ;-)))

Regards, B.



_______________________________________________
tsl-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.trustix.org/mailman/listinfo/tsl-discuss

_______________________________________________
tsl-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.trustix.org/mailman/listinfo/tsl-discuss

Reply via email to