On 06/03/2008, at 12:28 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
stale-if-error
stale-while-revalidate
- Um, so why did you (the sponsor for these two I believe) not also
request their addition in -3 for future-proofing your install app?
Because -3 isn't on our roadmap, for the reasons cited. If it appears
there, I imagine we could easily fund the conversion (although I
should check with H to see if that was already included; to be frank,
it wasn't really even on my radar).
You need to find a killer app for -3 that has broader appeal than
just
ICAP and ESI.
3.0 was about parity with needs. It failed some in that regard.
3.1 is about making up that failure plus some.
Is seamless IPv6, SSL control, and weighted round-robin not enough
of a
killer app for you?
Not particularly. The thing is, for most any functionality, I can get
there more quickly by funding it in -2; until -3 is ready for
production use, it doesn't make sense to fund features in it (see
above).
A killer app for -3 would be multi-core support (and the perf
advantages that it would bring), or something else that the re-
architecture makes possible that isn't easy in -2. AIUI, though, that
isn't the case; i.e., -3 doesn't make this significantly easier.
Well, to shed some light on things (I hate secrecy too). The core
discussions are all about what we are going to publicly say so we
don't
contradict ourselves and confuse people too much. Often personal
messages
between individuals. We ruffle each others feathers at times too.
None of
which is something people exactly want public. The rest is going
through
squid-dev and squid-users.
Well, I guess that's good to hear, but I do note that having a private
"core" list on an OS project is AFAIK not that common.
Cheers,
--
Mark Nottingham mnot@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
