Re: NTLM status on Squid 3.0

Hi Henrik,

At 00.15 24/01/2005, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:

>On Sun, 23 Jan 2005, Serassio Guido wrote:
>
>>My question comes from the doubt about the opportunity of merge into HEAD
>>some forward ported NTLM changes that should be replaced from a new NTLM
>>implementation after a few time, or, in the worst case, could conflict
>>with the NTLM refactoring.
>
>The major risk here is waste of efforts, with the refactoring throwing out
>most if not all of the code related to the bugfixes..

I agree.

>On the other hand, if the bugfixes involve any changes to the core of
>Squid then these parts is very valuable to get ported across to Squid-3.

True, the only solution that I can see is to forward port every change,
even with a waste of effort, and use the merged code as starting point of
the refactoring, but, if I have understood right, the refactoring should be
already started.

>Any bugfixes related to challenge reuse is obviously not very important to
>get ported across as that part will be thrown out anyway.

Yes, but probably the effort of forward port all changes would be less than
trying to clean the challenge reuse.

Regards

Guido

-
========================================================
Guido Serassio
Acme Consulting S.r.l. - Microsoft Certified Partner
Via Gorizia, 69 10136 - Torino - ITALY
Tel. : +39.011.3249426 Fax. : +39.011.3293665
Email: guido.serassio@acmeconsulting.it
WWW: http://www.acmeconsulting.it/
Received on Tue Jan 25 2005 - 03:59:37 MST