On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 01:20 +1200, Reuben Farrelly wrote: > > On 23/04/2006 1:11 a.m., Robert Collins wrote: > > On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 00:58 +1200, Reuben Farrelly wrote: > >> On 23/04/2006 12:41 a.m., Robert Collins wrote: > >>> Asking adrian on irc - ' > >>> 22:34 < adrian__> Enough people using it as a traditional forward cache > >>> 22:34 < adrian__> and saying there aren't any strange problems > >>> 22:34 < adrian__> Because its got a bad name > >>> ' > >>> > >>> So, what is required. How can we engage the community in making squid-3 > >>> stable ? There seems to be non-trivial interest in making it happen, but > >>> whats the actual benchmark ? > >> I'll start using it again and pushing forward with bug reports if there's > >> someone there to work on them...last time I tried squid-3 I was seeing > >> some odd > >> stuff with client side connections being closed randomly and requiring > >> frequent > >> refreshing with my end browser, but at the time I didn't gather anything > >> useful. > > > > There are definately people doing things around the source - I think > > harnessing the energy is the issue. I only have a small amount of time, > > and I'll probably be using it on toolchain support to make it easier for > > others to fix bugs - because thats something effective I can do in the > > timeframes I have available. > > That's cool. > > Changing the subject a little, there have been many new people introduce > themselves on this list maybe with good intentions of working on squid, who > seem > to vanish as fast as they arrive. I wonder if they've simply (a) never > intended > to contribute in the first place, (b) done some work privately but never > released it or (c) taken a good look at the code, and run away fast deciding > it > was all too hard ;-)
> > > > From a development perspective, I think it'd be of value to know why are > there > not more people developing squid. It seems to be just a "hardcore" > few......... Yep. Agree with this. > > I've added some missing files - I could swear I had added them. Is that > > better? > > Yes, gets much further now, but runs into grief again here: .. > > I guess a few more missing files. Added, hopefully got them all now. Rob -- GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
