Re: IPv6 developments for HEAD

On Wed, Apr 11, 2007, squid3@treenet.co.nz wrote:

> > Trouble is: squid-3 should've been released a long, long time ago and
> > users
> > should've been moved over to it. People kept commiting stuff to Squid-3 in
> > the hopes of "tidying stuff up" and people (somewhat) forgot that fixing
> > the
> > bugs and getting the release out there's more important.
>
> Agreed, which is the main reason I am witholding a further 170Kb of stable
> update in my feature branch until the next (PRE6?) release is out or shown
> to be too far away to matter.
>
> As someone who has happily been using 3.0-PRE5 in production for about 5
> months now I'm thinking more in terms of 3.0-PRE5, 3.0-PRE6, 3.0-PRE7,
> working up towards 3.0-STABLE1 which has all the asked for features of
> 2.6-X than 3.0 / 3.1.

Cool.

> Question then becomes, where is the existing list of agreed features for
> 3.0-STABLE1 ??

http://wiki.squid-cache.org/RoadMap

> Trouble is the cleaner the code, the less bugs can hide in it.
> Personally I'm of the opinion that bugs should be fixed in the latest
> version and ported down to earlier versiosn that might need it rather than
> up. Promotig the use of later better code by all users.

I think the best thing for the project will be:

* Get a release manager and an architect!
* Get squid-3.0 out the door, and now
* Fix up all the bugs with the minimum required code fudging
* Fix all the other bugs that people see as they migrate from squid-2.6 to squid-3;
* then worry about the big code tidyups.

<selfish mode=on>
I'd really, really like to drop squid-2 on the floor and focus on Squid-3
but I can't until it's stable and I just don't have the brain cycles to dedicate
to trying to fix it more than I've done.. that and I'd like to take it in
a specific direction which may or may not mash with other developers.
</selfish>

Adrian
Received on Tue Apr 10 2007 - 21:25:24 MDT