sön 2007-03-18 klockan 15:51 +0200 skrev Tsantilas Christos: > Hi Henrik, > I forgot that the squid-26 moved to a branch. The problem with icap > patch is that it is HEAD based. In sourceforge I can not find any > squid-2.6 branch, to create a squid26 based icap branch.
Yes, it's intentional that there is no Squid-2.6 base branch at sourceforge, only Squid-2.HEAD. This was discussed on squid-dev when Squid-2.6.STABLE forked. The main reason is that Squid-2.HEAD acts as an incubator for changes targeted for Squid-2 STABLE, and having development efforts not tracking Squid-2.HEAD makes it harder to finish the work over time. Now, this policy of not having a Squid-2.6.STABLE branch at SourceForge is not set in stone, but I have not seen much good reasons why it should be changed. The only objection to the above raised was Guido who historically have maintained SquidNT.STABLE at SourceForge, but after a short discussion it was agreed that maintaining the SquidNT.STABLE branch is better done in the main repository as an official STABLE Squid version. With the Squid-2 ICAP client still being somewhat experimental I do not consider it a good idea to use in combination with Squid-2.6.STABLE. I would very much prefer if people uses Squid-2.HEAD + icap if they need that functionality, and knowing that their Squid version is experimental and not a STABLE version. The recent bug reports is further evidence that this position is reasonable. Several people coming yelling about Squid-2.6.STABLE insability, not mentioning (or maybe not even realizing) that they have applied significant experimental patches to their Squid version. This said, Squid-2.HEAD is quite fit for production use most of the time. I don't even have a significant problem with snapshot releases of Squid-2.HEAD being packaged if someone likes, but we are not going to make any formal releases from that source tree. What is in Squid-2.HEAD either trickles into Squid-2.6.STABLE or forms the basis for a eventual future Squid-2.7 when not compatible with 2.6. > Does make sense to create the icap-patch as a file and upload it to web > site? I think it is not bad idea to allow people to use it with squid26 > if they want it. Which is your advice? Sure. Always makes sense to publish stable versions, but only if there is a will to support them. If you do I would recommend changing the Squid version number in configure.in to reflect the ICAP patch release version to reduce confusion. > At this time I do not want to continue development on squid2x-icap > client but I want to keep icap patch synchronized with squid2x > developments. Ok. Fully fair position. So the remaining question is if you agree with what I say above, or if you think squid2-icap should be maintained relative to Squid-2.6 as well. Regards Henrik
signature.asc
Description: Detta är en digitalt signerad meddelandedel