David Brownlee <abs%absd.org@localhost> writes: >> To me, this is the big question. If 5.5 is not yet EOL, and there are >> significant things that work with 5.5 and not with 5.6 (and not a lot >> that fails with 5.5 and needs 5.6), then it seems too soon to switch. >> >> For packages that have optional php bits, especially those that have >> optional bits for various languages, using a phpXY- prefix seems too >> much. But for packages which are fundementally php (can't work without >> it), then it seems those should have prefixes, which will get us >> multiple binary packages. > > Is the issue only the 'php using packages without php-XY- prefix', or > are there some cases where one of those packages builds fine under 56, > but people need an optional module which is only available under 55? > > If the latter, is it unusual enough that we can expect users to manage > themselves. > > If the former, which packages have an issue? I know I've been using > roundcube under 5.6 for probably a year. > > Is "all" that is needed for someone to go down the list of 'php using > packages without php-XY- prefix' and check if any do not support 56? In general (not about php), I think pkgsrc should not make changes that have the potential for signficant breakage in the month or so leading up to the freeze. In this case, I think everyone thinks 5.5 is safe, and opinions are mixed on 5.6. So I think it makes sense to change the default to 5.5 right now, and then post branch to evaluate whether it's time to change to 5.6.
Attachment:
pgpHb3ywaVXdH.pgp
Description: PGP signature