Re: so what is involved in calling squid-3.0 'stable'?

On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 01:20 +1200, Reuben Farrelly wrote:
>
> On 23/04/2006 1:11 a.m., Robert Collins wrote:
> > On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 00:58 +1200, Reuben Farrelly wrote:
> >> On 23/04/2006 12:41 a.m., Robert Collins wrote:
> >>> Asking adrian on irc - '
> >>> 22:34 < adrian__> Enough people using it as a traditional forward cache
> >>> 22:34 < adrian__> and saying there aren't any strange problems
> >>> 22:34 < adrian__> Because its got a bad name
> >>> '
> >>>
> >>> So, what is required. How can we engage the community in making squid-3
> >>> stable ? There seems to be non-trivial interest in making it happen, but
> >>> whats the actual benchmark ?
> >> I'll start using it again and pushing forward with bug reports if there's
> >> someone there to work on them...last time I tried squid-3 I was seeing some odd
> >> stuff with client side connections being closed randomly and requiring frequent
> >> refreshing with my end browser, but at the time I didn't gather anything useful.
> >
> > There are definately people doing things around the source - I think
> > harnessing the energy is the issue. I only have a small amount of time,
> > and I'll probably be using it on toolchain support to make it easier for
> > others to fix bugs - because thats something effective I can do in the
> > timeframes I have available.
>
> That's cool.
>
> Changing the subject a little, there have been many new people introduce
> themselves on this list maybe with good intentions of working on squid, who seem
> to vanish as fast as they arrive. I wonder if they've simply (a) never intended
> to contribute in the first place, (b) done some work privately but never
> released it or (c) taken a good look at the code, and run away fast deciding it
> was all too hard ;-)

>
>
>
> From a development perspective, I think it'd be of value to know why are there
> not more people developing squid. It seems to be just a "hardcore" few.........

Yep. Agree with this.

> > I've added some missing files - I could swear I had added them. Is that
> > better?
>
> Yes, gets much further now, but runs into grief again here:
..
>
> I guess a few more missing files.

Added, hopefully got them all now.

Rob

-- 
GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.