Re: [squid-dev] [RFC] Squid 4.0 ideas

2015-03-15 Thread Eliezer Croitoru
Just couple notes from me. One feature or more can be considered a good reason for a new version. If we aim for the enterprise level users\admins then some if not most of them would like to run a stable feature\version. The state of squid now is very good compared to v2-v3. Maybe it's not the

Re: [squid-dev] [RFC] Squid 4.0 ideas

2015-03-13 Thread Henrik Nordström
tis 2015-03-10 klockan 23:58 +1300 skrev Amos Jeffries: There is approximately 8-18 months year between series releases now. A very arbitrary choice whenever it seems reasonable to release a batch of features. My undertanding of the proposal stated was that we keep that current practice, but

Re: [squid-dev] [RFC] Squid 4.0 ideas

2015-03-12 Thread Alex Rousskov
On 03/07/2015 10:04 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote: Proposal 2) We are developing Squid with an incremental development process. The initial major version number is effectively meaningless in that process. We should move from the major.minor.patch to just a release.patch numbering system. This

Re: [squid-dev] [RFC] Squid 4.0 ideas

2015-03-12 Thread Amos Jeffries
On 10/03/2015 5:41 a.m., Alex Rousskov wrote: On 03/07/2015 10:04 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote: Proposal 2) We are developing Squid with an incremental development process. The initial major version number is effectively meaningless in that process. We should move from the major.minor.patch to

Re: [squid-dev] [RFC] Squid 4.0 ideas

2015-03-12 Thread Henrik Nordström
sön 2015-03-08 klockan 07:49 +0100 skrev Kinkie: Beta releases can be managed just like they are now: MAJ.0.X would be beta MAJ.Y (Y=1) would be stable Correct. Today we have release numbers that is made of major.minor (2.5, 3.0, 3,1.., 3.5), followed by patchlevel where beta releases are

Re: [squid-dev] [RFC] Squid 4.0 ideas

2015-03-12 Thread Alex Rousskov
On 03/10/2015 04:58 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote: On 10/03/2015 5:41 a.m., Alex Rousskov wrote: On 03/07/2015 10:04 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote: Proposal 2) We are developing Squid with an incremental development process. The initial major version number is effectively meaningless in that process.

Re: [squid-dev] [RFC] Squid 4.0 ideas

2015-03-07 Thread Kinkie
The Foundation board has had a bit of discussion about this proposal during the last meeting and countered with a different proposal for consideration. Otherwise are split over whether to change at all, and with good reasons on all sides of he decision. Proposal 2) We are developing

Re: [squid-dev] [RFC] Squid 4.0 ideas

2015-03-07 Thread Amos Jeffries
On 20/10/2014 10:38 a.m., Amos Jeffries wrote: Kinkie brought up the idea of a Squid 4.x release in IRC. I have mentioned to a few clients who asked when 4.0 would be out that we will probably want it to be a big reason, like changing the language was between the 2.x to 3.x versions. I