On 08.03.2012 06:35, Alex Rousskov wrote:
On 03/05/2012 03:15 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
The checklist I have to work by is at
http://wiki.squid-cache.org/ReleaseProcess#Squid-3
We are looping around at the "freeze" stage (3), waiting to reach 0
major+ bugs before we can start the stable release countdown stages
(4+).
We are intending 3.2 to supersede and obsolete all 3.x and 2.x
series
releases. Which means there are just over 50 bugs rated major or
higher
which need to be confirmed as fixed in 3.2, or downgraded before 3.2
can
start its stability countdown.
A lot of these bugs, particularly 2.x ones, just need somebody to
check and verify that the described behaviour is not reproducible in
3.2
anymore. At which point they can be closed against target of 3.2.
Another half dozen or so got closed this month, but there are many
more
to go.
I think it is neither reasonable nor practical to make Squid v3.2
"stable" designation dependent on 2.x bugs, especially those filed
years
ago with insufficient information. Squid v3.2 can be stable
regardless
of what bugs the old 2.x version had.
The 2.x and 3.0 ones updated >6 months ago with insufficient
information to even reproduce should be closed with a 4-week warning /
last call for info. They should all have minor/normal status anyway and
not be what is under discussion here.
Most of the major+ ones should have sufficient info for someone with
specific environment or software to reproduce. A lot just seem to
require specific software we do not have easily available within the dev
team.
The LDAP special-characters and escaping bugs for instance, just need
someone with a real LDAP server (not a test script) to configure a dummy
account and see if login works now. A real server is important there
because it is the servers interpretation of helper calls which is the
bug.
Sure, it would be very good to go through and close all bugs, but I
do
not see enough folks jumping at such opportunity in the foreseeable
future (at least partially because such exercise would have little to
do
with Squid v3.2 actual stability!).
I suggest that v2.x bugs without Squid3 confirmations are ignored
when
it comes to deciding whether Squid v3.2 is stable.
"all" is the dream, "major or higher" is the release requirement. I
made a point that they just need to be checked by someone with the
ability/environment to reproduce.
Thank you for your help in weeding out a few more today. We just hit 45
:)
Amos
