> On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 01:13 +1300, Amos Jeffries wrote: >> Hm, yes. Henrik, is there a report somewhere that lgroups the merged >> changesets the same way the maintainer merge.html lists the un-merged >> and non-merged ones? > > There is a merge.html in 2.7 showing what's unique for 2.7 and not merged > to 2.6. > > http://www.squid-cache.org/Versions/v2/2.7/changesets/merge.html > > But remember that quite a lot of the 2/3 differences is from before we > split cvs into changesets.. Better to work from cf.data.pre differences > I think as most features show up in cf.data.pre.. > > Most bugfixes have been ported I think, at least outside COSS.. >
Hmm, this leaves the two of us maintainers with a choice I think Henrik. As it stands we can call one or the other an up/down and leave things as-is. I'm minded to call 2.6 a 'down' of 3.0 and 3.0/2.7/2.6 downs of 3.1. I have not looked closely at the update script to see if thats right though. But there is an alternative of making a .cross type if we can figure an easy way to do it. Amos
