Re: SSLBump

From: Henrik Nordström <henrik@dont-contact.us>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 04:17:27 +0100

ons 2008-01-09 klockan 15:36 +1300 skrev Amos Jeffries:
> Henrik Nordström wrote:
> > tis 2008-01-08 klockan 16:36 -0700 skrev Alex Rousskov:
> >
> >> This may be a little too aggressive. I expect AsyncCalls and eCAP to
> >> become more-or-less stable by the end of January. On the other hand,
> >> perhaps PRE1 does not mean a merge freeze.
> >
> > PRE means feature complete but there may still be known blockers.
>
> Well, that would mean no release except snapshots until late March
> sometime. Is it a fixed definition?

There is a DEVEL state before that if things are still under
development.

The documented process is here:

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

but as usual it do not really match the process we use. The process
actuallu used is much less strict, and DEVEL is used when the tree is
not yet featurefrozen.

What happened with 3.0 is not how its supposed to be, where we bended
PRE almost indefinitely for the 3.0 release instead of going back to
unfrozen state.. As a user you should not really notice any big changes
between PRE1 and STABLE1 other than improved stability, documentation
and features actually working the way they are meant to...

> I've always thought of PRE as; existing code stable enough for wide
> testing with possible blockers or future features (up to freeze date).
> One of the later PRE being set around a roadmapped date of feature-freeze.

Thats DEVELx releases. Snapshots of the development tree at times we
think the tree is useful for end-user testing to get feedback on what
have been done. Not used very much with the branched development as HEAD
is now usable for that purpose nearly always..

> RC being feature complete with no known blockers after the freeze date.

RC being something we consider a possible STABLE release, for checking
packaging & portability bugs etc.

The process used for Squid-2 has relaxed things a bit more in that the
branching is done when the tree is feature complete (i.e. approaching
PRE1), and I propose the same is done for 3.1.

Regards
Henrik

Received on Tue Jan 08 2008 - 20:20:05 MST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wed Jan 30 2008 - 12:00:09 MST