RE: Patch: splay-tree-based version of the proxy_auth ACL

I'm ok either way: I'm not going anyware anytime soon, and as it's on
sourceforge I shouldn't need to keep fiddling to keep the code
functional so 2.4 or 2.5 is ok by me.

Rob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henrik Nordstrom [mailto:hno@hem.passagen.se]
> Sent: Wednesday, 18 October 2000 2:21 PM
> To: Adrian Chadd
> Cc: Robert Collins; squid-dev@squid-cache.org
> Subject: Re: Patch: splay-tree-based version of the proxy_auth ACL
>
>
> Adrian Chadd wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 18, 2000, Robert Collins wrote:
> > > so the NTLM is actually ready for merging then (assuming
> the code is
> > > stable)?
> >
> > Depends entirely upon Duane and Henrik. I thought that the NTLM code
> > required the reworked pump code, right ?
>
> Right. So the NTLM branch cannot be considered a merge
> candidate unless
> that code also is.
>
> All I intended to say was that WHEN we decide that NTLM
> should be merged
> then the code is ready to be merged without porting. I did
> not intend to
> indicate that NTLM should be merged now.
>
> Note that the first critera still applies: We must decide
> that NTLM is a
> merge candidate. As I said earlier I think NTLM belongs in
> 2.5 not 2.4,
> so before merging 2.4 needs to get out of the way, but once the 2.5
> cycle starts it should get merged quite early.
>
> Duane has already given go on killing pump for that matters... but the
> code still requires a review to make sure cbdata and such things are
> used where it applies.
>
> /Henrik
>
>
Received on Tue Oct 17 2000 - 22:01:30 MDT