Hi Henrik,
At 15.23 24/06/2006, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
Regarding new features in Squid-3 I think the devel.squid-cache.org
model should now be followed quite strictly.
1. A new feature is developed in a floating branch using the vcs of
choice (i.e. CVS with our scripts or Baz).
2. Any bug fixes or similar plumbing work done while implementing the
new feature is trickled back into mainline. The branch should be kept
clean with only the new feature.
3. When the new feature is ready and used in production it's announced
as ready for merging, and placed in the merge queue with review etc..
I agree.
This development model is what has made the 2.6 release possible in the
short timeframe available.
> Thanks - good to know the history. I repeat what I said before about
> having this kind of stuff on the website: we need an up to date News
> section + homepage coverage. Otherwise only about 6 people in the
> entire world know about it. What we're missing is an easy way to
> update the main web content, otherwise it won't get done... Can we
> port the entire website to the new Wiki?
We indeed need a more living homepage.. unfortunately none of the
project members likes spending time with writing web pages..
What about to look for a not developer webmaster ?
A skilled Squid "power user" could be enough for a good majority of
the changes.
> Would everyone on this list support the following:
>
> 1. No more 2.x development - new features must be against 3.x
Sorry, until Squid-3.0.STABLE is in such shape that it can run in
production without the admins having to worry all night this won't
happen. Even if we all promise. Simple fact of life..
But as soon as we get Squid-3 in production quality shape this should
apply I think.
I agree.
> 2. Release 3.0.STABLE as quickly as possible (stability is priority,
> still may lack features from 2.6)
Yes.
Here I agree about the reasons, but I am doubtful about a 3.0 with
not all the 2.6 features:
why someone will "downgrade" its proxy ?
Just for example: all my customers are waiting for connection pinning
with open arms ....
> 3. Release 3.1 soon after that (feature complete, 2.6 is obsoleted)
To be honest I think the two will coexists for some time. But Squid-3
will win over time.
I remember the proposal when 2.6 work was announced:
1) 3.0 initially mainly for high end reverse proxies (ICAP & ESI) and
2.6 for forward proxies
2) 3.1 for both usage with all features.
It seems to me a good compromise for a customer.
Regards
Guido
-
========================================================
Guido Serassio
Acme Consulting S.r.l. - Microsoft Certified Partner
Via Lucia Savarino, 1 10098 - Rivoli (TO) - ITALY
Tel. : +39.011.9530135 Fax. : +39.011.9781115
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.acmeconsulting.it/
