On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Duane Wessels wrote:
> Looking at the current wishlist for 2.6 I think it is too long and
> too ambitious. I would rather that people spend time on squid-3,
> but that is perhaps a selfish reason.
As indicated in my earlier message I have not been able to find customers
willing to fund Squid-3 only development. In all development requests I
have been involved in the request has been to deliver a stable version for
the current STABLE release (i.e. 2.5) and in addition to get the feature
into the development version for future maintenance (i.e. 3).
There has never been any problem in convincing the customers that the
development also has to be done for Squid-3, and that this will add some
time to the total development cost compared to a 2.5 only solution.
I sincerely does not expect a 2.6 release to make this much different. My
hope is instead kind of the opposite that we by getting this 2.6 release
together will draw more attention to Squid and make it easier to find
people interested in funding various aspects of the development.
In addition a 2.6 release would reduce my maintenance costs significantly
as I currently have to maintain about 10 different Squid-2.5 trees, and
with the 2.6 release this can be brought down to one or maybe two trees..
Regards
Henrik
Received on Wed Nov 02 2005 - 15:03:09 MST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Thu Dec 01 2005 - 12:00:15 MST