Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
>
> 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.
I agree.
>
> 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.
>
Yes this is true...
>> 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.
The true is that I do not want to give a lot of time for squid26 icap
patch now. Maybe I will make an icap patch for squid26 if people
continue asking about it.
I must update the icap record at projects page. I will do it this evening...
>
> 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.
Fully agree. Thanks!
Regards,
Christos
