Re: [squid-users] squid 2.7 vs 3.x

Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 13, 2008, Tek Bahadur Limbu wrote:
>> Hi Adrian,
>>
>> So does that mean that there will be no Squid-2.6.19?
>> Will Squid-2.6.STABLE19 be Squid-2.7.STABLE1 ?
>
> I'm not aware that the Squid volunteers have ever given a lifetime
> for a Squid release. I think, given that its all volunteer work,
> that what we've been supporting is pretty good. :)
>
> -I- see Squid-2.7 as the logical migration path for Squid-2.6 users.
> Fixes will be backported as appropriate but feature backporting will be done
> as time permits. Squid-2.7 is a bit of a leap from Squid-2.6 but its only
> a small leap; its not anywhere near a big a leap as Squid-3 is.

For that matter squid-3 is not a huge leap itself either.

For some who have tried it there were two stumbling blocks;
  It may be missing features they need. If you are being held to 2.x
because 3.x is missing a feature you need be it large or small, please
speak up *now* and we will attempt to ensure that feature gets into a
3.x release sooner rather than later. The features of 3.1 are open for
requests now and for a short while.

  Others needing a super-high-performance squid stick with 2.x. Until we
get a performance tester digging into the new 3.x code (as Adrian has
done for 2.6), it will be slightly slower (ie I think its at early 2.6
sort of speeds still).

The release and migration path is presently:

2.5 - 2.6 - 2.7 - ? \
   \ - \- 3.0 -\ 3.1 - 3.2

we would like 3.2+ sitting after 2.7 in all areas of measurement. But
only time will tell if a developer can be found for some needed pieces.
So expect two versions to be around for a while yet in parallel. With
people moving up when they are able as the new-improved squid. Only we
have no idea how many are on each version as most users don't provide
feedback.

>
> That said, the support company I'm setting up should be finalised in a week
> or so; I'll then actually be offering support contracts on Squid versions.
> If people pay for support contracts then their specific Squid release
> versions (2.6, 2.7, 3.0, whatever) will have bugfixes backported as required.
> If people pay for Squid-2.6 support and enough people are subscribed to it
> then I'll quite happily keep 2.6 maintained if people are willing to pay. :)
>
> Adrian
>

Amos

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