> On Wed, May 07, 2008, Christian Seifert wrote:
>> Or if you could merge 2.7 into 3.0, that would also help. Seems like 3.0
>> currently doesnt have the storeurl_program options....
>
> When the 3.0 developers push out a stable tree which people can move
> to, sure, I'll look at merging stuff of mine into -3.
>
> But right now I don't find -3 "fun" to work on,
There you have the crux of the entire (5 year?) Squid-2 vs Squid-3 debate.
Adrian doesn't find C++ code 'fun'.
> and commercial work
> aside, I still hack on Squid for fun. Commercial work not aside,
> I don't agree with the directions that -3 is currently taking, and
> until there's a more sensible and stable codebase I can't justify
> suggesting that {current, new} clients migrate to Squid-3.
Come on, define 'sensible code' and stability for the readers please.
2.7 is less stable than 3.0 at present. The old roadmap from 2.7 to 2.8
included sweeping core changes more destabilising than the 3.0->3.1 ones.
>From the stats 12% of the squid users (on Linux with basic packages) are
using 3.0 now over all versions of 2.x. _On_top_ of the 10% increase in
total users 2.x (all versions) had over the period since 3.0 was released.
>
> (This is why I forked off Squid-2 into Cacheboy, btw.)
And why we concreted, tested, and fixed up squid-3 to released 3.0 full of
the existing stable changes. Prior to adding much of the fancy new stuff
from 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, and 2.9.
We in squid-3 agree with you Christian. If only the 2.6 and 2.7 changes
were also ported to 3.x when they had passed testing in 2.x there would be
not quite such a mess of shifting goalposts and last-minute catchup
features plugged on top of (de-stabilizing!) 3.1.
Anyhow thats another topic.
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: Amos Jeffries <squid3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 7, 2008 5:38:06 AM
>> Subject: Re: cache of 404 and redirects
>>
>> On Thu, May 08, 2008, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>>
>> > http://www.squid-cache.org/Versions/v3/3.0/cfgman/acl.html
>> >
>> > acl ... http_status 200 304 ...
>>
>> Hm, I might have to drag this back to Squid-2.HEAD and 2.7 after
>> release.
>> Thanks!
>>
>> > and:
>> > http://www.squid-cache.org/Versions/v3/3.0/cfgman/reply_header_access.html
>> >
>> > http://www.squid-cache.org/Versions/v3/3.0/cfgman/request_header_access.html
>>
>> I was reasonably sure we had those for Squid-2 but I could be wrong.
>>
Squid-2 has header_access, which blocks both directions indiscriminately.
This was upgraded in 3.0 to give more control over the direction being
blocked.
Amos
