Alex Rousskov wrote:
On Wed, 2008-03-19 at 11:15 +1300, Amos Jeffries wrote:

The file re-arranging polish:
- I'm kind of in favour of it as a pure file-movements-only alteration. 3.2 has no feature-requests yet and back-porting across a file-re-arranged setup is likely to be more trouble than its worth.

Can you clarify the above? I am not disagreeing, but am not sure whether
you are saying we should move/rename files in 3.1.

I want to see it done in 3.1, but I'd personally prefer it happens close to the 3.0/3.1 switchover. ie the last changes to go in.

The maintainer hat on me thinks that if its not done in 3.1, I might be back-porting stuff for a while until 3.2 is worked out. For that whole as-yet-undefined period I don't want to be re-arranging patches because the files are in different places.

Likewise from the point its done to the point we release 3.1 and close 3.0 series off I'll be doing the same downwards anyway.

I'd like both periods of trouble to be as short as possible.

- If you think you can get it done in a reasonable timespan to get done by the RC releases great. I don't think the PRE need to wait for it, its polish after all not a true feature.
  - It is your baby though.


If you have the resources to move a few 2.6 features to 3.1 they should be timelined by 31 March or officially shifted to 3.2 pending later re-evaluation. Yes?

Agreed. I am still evaluating what needs to be ported and whether the
Factory can sponsor any of that.

Thank you,


Please use Squid 2.6STABLE17+ or 3.0STABLE1+
There are serious security advisories out on all earlier releases.

Reply via email to