Re: Squid 3.1 pre1?

Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
> On mån, 2008-07-14 at 03:01 +1200, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>> I brought this up a while ago with a timeline update request for Alex,
>> and we have had no response from him in the duration. I assume that
>> means he is too busy on other business to complete the three major
>> features, well overdue, on the TODO list under his name.
>>
>> So, votes for releasing 3.1.PRE1 as soon as possible with the current
>> done list of features?
>
> +1, but you know that from the maintenance algorithm I proposed
> earlier..
>
> But still a bit worried about the asynccall effects.. I don't think PRE1
> is suitable until those is better understood.

I thought you and Alex had thrashed that all out to understanding weeks
back? At least as far as I followed the thread it all made sense.

Whats left in your mind as unsorted?

 From a user perspective 3.1 is stable enough for uses and testing.
Thats why I'm proposing a PRE. I think the last few bugs and any Async
side-effects we have not found yet can be worked out in a few
PRE-cycles. As long as its started before any more big features go in to
muddle things up again.

Amos

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