Sounds good to me. On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 6:37 AM, Amos Jeffries <squ...@treenet.co.nz> wrote: > As luck would have it today is exactly 1 year since the first patch was > held in trunk for 3.5 series release. > > Below is my current plan. Any objections please speak up. > > > 1) Branching: > > I hope this can be done next weekend. August 1-3, maybe the week after > if there are delays. > > We have enough features to make it useful even though some of the larger > projects have not made it in. > > However, to minimize work in stage-2 trunk needs to be relatively stable > before this happens. If any of you have patches lined up for commit or > about to be, please reply to this mail with details so we can triage > what gets in and what can hold off in audit. > > Note that patches applied after branching may still get to 3.5, but will > have to be stable in trunk first. > > Patches that are welcome any time: > - documentation updates > - security bug fixes > > > 2) Documentation and stability testing > > After branching we need to do as much testing as we can throw at the new > branch and update any missing documentation. > > Most of the documentation is already done. So its just a scan through to > check for missing or incorrect bits. > > > 3) 3.5.0.1 > > I am hoping this can be done by the end of August. Will happen whenever > step-2 is completed. > > > Stable) as usual depends on bugs > > 2 bugs explicitly on 3.HEAD within the 3.5 development period are > blocking stable release until fixed or determined non-critical. > > 12 major or higher bugs in 3.4 seem worthy of blocking 3.5 stable for a > bit to get resolved. > > We have 60 other major bugs outstanding across all Squid versions that > should be resolved ASAP if at all possible. > > > ************ > > Projects I am aware of that are potentially coming up for commit over > this period: > > * Kerberos autoconf updates > - assuming the current rewrite patch > > * PROXY protocol > - assuming the current partial support patch > > * Peek-n-Splice > - assuming it is relatively isolated changes and well tested already > > * StoreID via eCAP/ICAP > - I'm not sure what this is waiting on. > > > Amos
-- Francesco