FreeBSD Port: php5-5.2.11_1 upgrade path to 5.3.0/1

[Oliver Schonrock]

Hi Alex

You are probably aware of the discussion
here:http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=5132

Obviously php5.3 is major upgrade which breaks some backwards compatibility:
http://www.php.net/manual/en/migration53.incompatible.php

and poses some new challenges for compiling the ports eg for the new native
mysql driver for the mysql(i)/PDO extensions:
http://www.php.net/manual/en/mysqlnd.install.php

We are very active users of the php ports, are keen to upgrade to 5.3 (and
5.3.1 when released) and wanted to offer our help in testing of the new ports
if that's helpful.

Do you plan to create a php53 set of ports or just update the php5 set?

How far have you got?

Kind Regards


--
Oliver Schonrock
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@..."

[Alex Dupre]

Oliver Schonrock ha scritto:
> Do you plan to create a php53 set of ports or just update the php5 set?

The plan is to update the current set of php5 ports. The update is quite
ready, but one important piece is missing: Zend Optimizer.
This waiting time will also allow developers to make their application
compatible with php 5.3.x.

--
Alex Dupre
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@..."

[Miroslav Lachman]

Alex Dupre wrote:
> Oliver Schonrock ha scritto:
>> Do you plan to create a php53 set of ports or just update the php5 set?
>
> The plan is to update the current set of php5 ports. The update is quite
> ready, but one important piece is missing: Zend Optimizer.
> This waiting time will also allow developers to make their application
> compatible with php 5.3.x.

So you don't plan to leave 5.2.x version in ports for people who need to
maintain servers in production with many clients and many 'old' web
applications?

Miroslav Lachman
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@..."

[Alex Dupre]

Miroslav Lachman ha scritto:
> So you don't plan to leave 5.2.x version in ports for people who need to
> maintain servers in production with many clients and many 'old' web
> applications?

Like we don't have ports for php 5.0 and 5.1, I'll not maintain ports
for 5.2 when the switchover will take place. As you can see here
(http://www.php.net/manual/en/migration53.incompatible.php) there aren't
many incompatible changes.

--
Alex Dupre
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@..."

[Miroslav Lachman]

Alex Dupre wrote:
> Miroslav Lachman ha scritto:
>> So you don't plan to leave 5.2.x version in ports for people who need to
>> maintain servers in production with many clients and many 'old' web
>> applications?
>
> Like we don't have ports for php 5.0 and 5.1, I'll not maintain ports
> for 5.2 when the switchover will take place. As you can see here
> (http://www.php.net/manual/en/migration53.incompatible.php) there aren't
> many incompatible changes.

I know there were not repo copy of older versions of PHP, but I think
this is where FreeBSD is loosing some points on "enterprise" market
against some other server OS distributions.
I know it is all about mans power and I am not trying to put some
pressure on you. Maintaining ports is not simple task and I know you are
maintainer of lot of them.
I am just thinking that it would be better if we can have versions of
PHP as with Apache [1.3, 2.0, 2.2] or MySQL [3.23, 4.0, 4.1, 5.0, 5.1,
5.4, 6.0 = all well maintained by you, of course ;)], or Postfix, Perl,
Python... so users and companies can stick longer time with "what is
well tested and working in production". (same as we have choice of
FreeBSD versions ~ 6.3, 6.4, 7.1, 7.2 + 8.0 in the near future)

Even if there are just a "few" incompatibilities, it means some clients
applications on webhosting will stop working and clients will scream on
helpline right after the update of the servers PHP...

I know it is not your problem etc., it is just a real world scenario of
some near future days ;)

So in my opinion it would be benefical to users if ports infrastructure
can handle all vendor supported branches for any port. PHP is just an
example in this case.

Miroslav Lachman
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@..."

[Doug Barton]

Miroslav Lachman wrote:
> Even if there are just a "few" incompatibilities, it means some clients
> applications on webhosting will stop working and clients will scream on
> helpline right after the update of the servers PHP...

Sounds like you're familiar with the problems, why don't you volunteer
to maintain the 5.2.x set of ports after a fork? Now both problems are
solved. :)

And yes, I'm serious, assuming that there will be updates in the 5.2.x
series that users will need. If not, simply not updating their
existing ports is a reasonable solution.


Doug

--

        Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with
        a domain name makeover!    http://SupersetSolutions.com/

_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@..."

[Miroslav Lachman]

Doug Barton wrote:
> Miroslav Lachman wrote:
>> Even if there are just a "few" incompatibilities, it means some clients
>> applications on webhosting will stop working and clients will scream on
>> helpline right after the update of the servers PHP...
>
> Sounds like you're familiar with the problems, why don't you volunteer
> to maintain the 5.2.x set of ports after a fork? Now both problems are
> solved. :)

I expected this answer :) And my answer is - I can try it. PHP with all
extensions is not the simplest way to start learning port maintaining,
but I can try it. The question is - are there committers willing to
commit it or is it something against some people opinion / against some
rules? (changes in Mk/bsd.php.mk will be needed)

> And yes, I'm serious, assuming that there will be updates in the 5.2.x
> series that users will need. If not, simply not updating their
> existing ports is a reasonable solution.

It can be useful even if there will be no more updates - in case
somebody need to install new machine in to farm with older versions.
[until there will be next security hole in PHP 5.2 :)]

Seriously - if ports team is willing to have "legacy" versions in ports,
we need to discuss some rules for this work. Not just for PHP, but more
general. In which conditions we need/allow them, the naming conventions
(some ports already have more versions but names are not consistent,
some ports are using -dev, -devel, -current [3 different sufixes for the
development branch], Perl always uses p5- prefix, Python have py25-,
py26- etc.)
So is it better to renumber the legacy (forked) version to
php52-ext_name-5.2.12 leaving php5- line for 5.3 version or do it like
Python (py25, py26): php52- and php53-.

And wouldn't it be better to have for example PHP 5.3 in "devel" state
in ports for some evaluation period - earlier before PHP 5.3 will be
given as new 5.x main line so more people can test it even with limited
features, web developers can write/test own apps for PHP 5.3 etc.?
Availability of the devel version will give possibility to those that
want to play with new features accepting the risk and lighten the
pressure on maintainers to commit the new version to the main line.

Again - I can try to do the php52 port if it have sense.

Miroslav Lachman
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@..."