Re: squid-2.5 related work

Hi,

At 15.55 12/04/2006, Reuben Farrelly wrote:

>On 12/04/2006 3:16 a.m., Adrian Chadd wrote:
>>I'd like to see a number of squid-2.5 related projects brought over
>>into monotone to make merging and managing them easier. I'd also like
>>to merge in changes into a 'head' branch so mature projects can be
>>merged in and then incorporated into the work of others.
>
>This is all starting to sound (again) more and more like 2.6 branch
>should be opened up. Unfortunately we're back where we started a
>few months ago in October whereby we had this discussion, a decision
>was made to stabilise 3.0 but alas we're not a whole lot closer to a
>release or stability with 3.0 now than we were back then. There was
>talk at the time about squid-3 being possibly a matter of months away.
>
>In other words, it seems that that many of Henrik's comments have
>turned out to be true (Sorry Alex and Rob):
>
>http://www.squid-cache.org/mail-archive/squid-dev/200511/0054.html
>
>I think we're getting to the point where we just have to do a 2.6
>release else the whole situation of us being stuck far from any sort
>of release or motivation risks dragging on for months or years
>longer. A line has to be drawn somewhere at which point we decide
>that current strategy is not working and to make a move in a
>different direction. My perception based on mails to -dev and -cvs
>is that 3.0 has stalled yet again, so lets not continue to wait
>indefinitely for progress which could be best described as "slow".

I agree, but I think that things now are worse than October:

The Adrian work is an effective fork of the Squid project, and I
think that a fork is a very dangerous option for the life of the
Squid project itself.

Today we should think again about a 2.6 release, before a disaster.
So I propose a new poll about this: for me now this is a survival
question for the Squid Project that we know.

>Aside from that, I'm seriously in favour of anything which gets away
>from any sort of dependency on Sourceforge. The entire SF anoncvs
>access has been down for over a week with no indication of when it
>will be back, and this is not the first time this year there have
>been major problems with it. I'll let Adrian and Rob fight the
>specifics of what we move to instead, as long as it's not CVS on
>sourceforge I'm happy ;-)

I agree, but I think that now this is only a technical detail.

Regards

Guido

-
========================================================
Guido Serassio
Acme Consulting S.r.l. - Microsoft Certified Partner
Via Lucia Savarino, 1 10098 - Rivoli (TO) - ITALY
Tel. : +39.011.9530135 Fax. : +39.011.9781115
Email: guido.serassio@acmeconsulting.it
WWW: http://www.acmeconsulting.it/
Received on Wed Apr 12 2006 - 13:30:52 MDT