Re: Summary of Squid-2.6 opinions

Hi Robert,

At 16.27 01/11/2005, Robert Collins wrote:

>Put me in here. I think getting 3.0 stable is not so hard, but will
>never happen if the focus remains on 2.5/2.6 - 2.6 should only have
>security fixes from 3.0.

Probably the release of Squid 2.6 will further delay the release of
Squid 3.0, but for me the question is when Squid 3.0 will be STABLE
without a 2.6 ?

My opinion is that currently the development work on Squid 3.0 is
something harder than on 2.5/2.6 for some reasons:
- There are not much developers that know C++ good as C
- Squid 3 C++ architecture is very sophisticated, but sometimes very
hard to understand, and there is only a little documentation about
- Robert, that is really the major player on the C++ Squid 3
refactoring was away from Squid development for too much time

So, if the development of Squid 3 will continue as the latest year,
really I'm not so sure that we will ever have a STABLE 3.0 with a
support and maintenance comparable to 2.5.

For me, the consolidation of existing 2.5 working patches and
enhancements into a 2.6 release is the only way to avoid things like this:
http://www.squid-cache.org/mail-archive/squid-dev/200510/0181.html.

Regards

Guido

-
========================================================
Guido Serassio
Acme Consulting S.r.l. - Microsoft Certified Partner
Via Lucia Savarino, 1 10098 - Rivoli (TO) - ITALY
Tel. : +39.011.9530135 Fax. : +39.011.9781115
Email: guido.serassio@acmeconsulting.it
WWW: http://www.acmeconsulting.it/
Received on Tue Nov 01 2005 - 09:43:48 MST