> On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 10:30 +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 01, 2007, Duane Wessels wrote: >> > squid-3.0.RC1 is now on the master web/ftp sites for download. >> > >> > Is now a good time to branch the CVS tree? Or would folks rather >> > wait until the first stable release? >> >> I'd leave it until after 3.0.STABLE1 actually. Leave it until >> we're in agreement its stable and > > I have no opinion on this part yet. I think folks with big pending > Squid3 patches or branches should decide. > >> there's a TODO list for 3.1. > > Deciding what to do in v3.1 should not affect branching v3.0 out, IMO. > My understanding is that once v3.0 is branched out, it is closed for any > significant development other than bug fixes. What features or changes > will eventually be in v3.1 should not affect that, should it? > > We already have "a TODO list" draft for 3.1: > http://www.squid-cache.org/bugs/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&product=Squid&version=3.0&target_milestone=---&target_milestone=3.1&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&bug_status=VERIFIED > > This is not exact, complete, or comprehensive (e.g., I assume IPv6 > support will be in v3.1 but ESI may not be), but can be a good starting > point for the discussion.
There is also this one with a few more items: http://wiki.squid-cache.org/Squid-3.1#head-533b554b1cc28966bbe9409b58a19bb1fe2ee7f1 Speaking of which. Adrian: You added the Comm-Layer re-write as first on that list. Is the code ready to be patched on immediately after the branching? or is there going to be a development delay while it gets written and tested? Amos