Alvaro Lopez Ortega wrote: > > On 23 Feb 2008, at 20:23, A.D.F. wrote: > > > > If you want to mark the distance between 0.5.x and current trunk, > > next branch could be named 0.8 (after relicensing it), > > so that in 0.9 we could add some of the planned steps for old 0.7 TODO > > along with new ones: > > > > [ ] Dtrace hooks > > [ ] priv.h on Solaris > > [ ] New header entry > > [ ] Generic caching (HTTP-Cache) > > [ ] Mime encodings separated from mime types > > [ ] Chuncked encoding > > > > [ ] flexible internal error reporting to syslog too, etc; > > [ ] full signal handling; > > [ ] HTTP/1.0 speed up; > > [ ] HTTP/1.1 pipelining speed up; > > [ ] sendfilev() support > > [ ] more I/O parameters; > > [ ] sophisticated file cacheing. > > > > The following ones could be added after 1.0 is released, > > i.e. in 1.1 or 1.2, unless someone contributes and > > donates the source code within the end of 2008: > > > > [ ] X-Sendfile > > [ ] WSGI handler > > [ ] AJPv13 handler > > [ ] WebDAV handler > > [ ] Upload progress module > > [ ] mod_evasive > > [ ] Memcached support > > [ ] Language support (handler?) > > > > The following ones could be added in 2.0: > > > > [ ] AIO based fdpoll > > [ ] splice() support > > It does also make sense to me. However, I would reduce the new feature > number in 0.8 and 0.9 to de minimum. In my opinion, a good roadmap > would be: > > 0.8.0 > ----- > [ ] New header entry > [ ] Mime encodings separated from mime types > [ ] Chuncked encoding > > 0.9.0 > ----- > [ ] full signal handling > [ ] flexible internal error reporting (to syslog?) > [ ] HTTP/1.0 speed up (not high priority) > [ ] HTTP/1.1 pipelining speed up (not high priority) > > I would postpone the rest to 1.0 or later, actually. In fact, these > improvements should not take us much time and we could release 1.0 > within... a couple of months? > > I think that bumping to a 1.0 release as soon as possible is a good > thing. But, even more important than reaching the 1.0 milestone soon, > is to release new versions often.
OK, I meant that 0.8.0 could be the next upcoming release (now 0.6.0 in trunk). I agree with you that removing new features and speeding up release process towards 1.0 (in order to release 1.0 within 4-5 months) would be a very good thing. -- Nick Name: A.D.F. E-Mail: <adefacc () tin ! it> E-Mail-Format: Plain Text only (please); view using font Courier New -- _______________________________________________ Cherokee mailing list [email protected] http://cherokee-project.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cherokee
