Re: so what is involved in calling squid-3.0 'stable'?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Robert Collins wrote:
> Asking adrian on irc - '
> 22:34 < adrian__> Enough people using it as a traditional forward cache
> 22:34 < adrian__> and saying there aren't any strange problems
> 22:34 < adrian__> Because its got a bad name
> '
>
> So, what is required. How can we engage the community in making squid-3
> stable ? There seems to be non-trivial interest in making it happen, but
> whats the actual benchmark ?

My own criteria: be able to deploy Squid3 with ESI as a reverse
accelarator under real load without it falling over (I don't run Squid
as a forward-cache at all).

Can somebody point to a current "how to help with Squid3 development"
document? E.g., I don't even know how to get a current checkout any
longer (arch / bzr / cvs, whatever).

Tres.
- --
===================================================================
Tres Seaver +1 202-558-7113 tseaver@palladion.com
Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFETPWm+gerLs4ltQ4RAl5dAJ9IN2rNtvpXjHjgDtpapPB2z6bj4ACeLx1Y
EPWCOkwC+zvZxmOd9L1uSog=
=KCpK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Mon Apr 24 2006 - 11:05:04 MDT