Re: Time for squid 3.0 STABLE2 ?

From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@dont-contact.us>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:25:19 +0100

On Mon, 2008-03-10 at 14:12 +1300, Amos Jeffries wrote:

> As it stands we can call one or the other an up/down and leave things as-is.
> I'm minded to call 2.6 a 'down' of 3.0 and 3.0/2.7/2.6 downs of 3.1. I
> have not looked closely at the update script to see if thats right though.

As I said I don't think using the changesets as tracking method for
determining what needs porting from Squid-2 to 3 is appropriate. Better
to start with cf.data.pre differences between the two which should now
be found in the release notes, and work from there (which secondare may
include collecting relevant changesets)

The changesets works for new small things (i.e. bugfixes to common code)
but those have been quite faithfully ported and still are, and best
tracked via bugzilla.

Many of the missing features is not even found in the changesets, and
often require substantial effort to port or reimplement, here the
changesets is just one input. These is best tracked via the releasenotes
I think, or their own branches when each effort gets started.

Regards
Henrik
Received on Thu Mar 13 2008 - 05:25:56 MDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Apr 01 2008 - 13:00:10 MDT