Search squid archive

Re: Re: Squid http1.1 vs http1.0 (probably again)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Oliver Schoett wrote:
Amos Jeffries wrote:
Aha, I knew this was around somewhere.
This is effectively the TODO list for HTTP/1.1 compliance if you are interested in sponsoring anyone to help with it: http://www.squid-cache.org/bugs/showdependencytree.cgi?id=411&hide_resolved=1

Due to the 2.x / 3.x version split, this can become confusing, as the state of this bug and its dependencies may be different in 2.x and in 3.x, and the Bugzilla dependency list does not reflect that. For example, bug 7 (which can hurt performance badly) is supposedly fixed in 2.7, but not yet in 3.x.

The way we do bugs here mitigates that a little. A clear comment when either version is patched and pushing the open target to another higher (numerically) version until all relevant releases are closed.

There are so many 3.x-specific bugs its rare that bugs scheduled for 2.x get a 3.x fix before the 2.x has patched and pushed it over.

Features are largely the reverse. Ported down. With the exception of Adrians work.

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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Samba]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Linux USB]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux