Re: RFC: delayed Logdaemon port merge

Guido Serassio wrote:
> Hi Amos,
>
> At 13.40 25/06/2008, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>>> Priorities are fine, but having some actual long-term directions to
>>> fit these features into a roadmap will make much more sense.
>>> Personally, I think you guys should consider fixing or reverting
>>> whatever stuff is in Squid-3.HEAD right this second which causes
>>> instability and release Squid-3.1.
>>
>> :-) Oh I'd love too...
>>
>> There's nothing in there right now thats inherently unstable
>> (excepting ESI and COSS from 3.0). Just a few bugs on the
>> high-priority track.
>
> Please also add the Windows support to the list, still totally broken
> and still without any usable VCS on Windows .....

Which list? the RoadMap?

I wouldn't call the windows support unstable (or destabilizing to the
rest of squid). I'd call it mostly missing already.

Amos

-- 
Please use Squid 2.7.STABLE3 or 3.0.STABLE7