Re: [squid-users] Squid-2, Squid-3, roadmap

Just so people aren't left wondering why there's been no response -
the best way to approach this is being discussed amongst the core
developers at the moment. It just co-incides with three of them -
Alex, Henrik and Robert- in transit to London.

That said, if anyone else has anything to offer on this topic - criticisms,
questions, etc - then please feel free to ask here.

Adrian

On Wed, Feb 27, 2008, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> Hello Squid folk,
>
> I maintain Yahoo!'s internal build of Squid, and serve as a resource
> for the various Y! properties that use it.
>
> We currently only use Squid-2, and don't have plans to migrate to
> Squid-3; although ESI, ICAP as well as eCAP look interesting, there
> are too many critical features (e.g., collapsed fowarding, refresh
> stale hit, full Vary/ETag support, not to mention several things in
> 2.7DEVEL0) missing for us to use it. Additionally, anecdotal evidence
> shows that it's still too unstable and slow for production use where
> these aspects are important; or at least, there is enough doubt about
> them to make switching too risky for too little benefit.
>
> I know that there's a lot of water under the bridge WRT -2 vs -3, and
> don't want to stir up what must seem like a very old discussion to the
> developers. However, there's not much clarity about the situation WRT
> 2 vs 3, and we've been in this state for a long period of time.
>
> Specifically, a few questions for the developers of Squid:
>
> * Besides the availability of *CAP and ESI -- which are very
> specialised, and of interest only to a subset of Squid users -- is
> there any user-visible benefit to switching to -3?
>
> * What do the developers consider to be a success metric for -3?
> I.e., when will maintenance on -2 stop?
>
> * Until that time, what is the development philosophy for Squid-2?
> Will it be only maintained, or will new features be added / rewrites
> be done as (possibly sponsored) resources are available? Looking at
> <http://wiki.squid-cache.org/RoadMap/Squid2 >, it seems to be the latter;
> is that the correct interpretation?
>
> * If that success metric is not reached, what is the contingency
> plan?
>
> * How will these answers change if a substantial number of users
> willingfully choose to stay on -2 (and not just because they neglect
> to update their software)?
>
>
> Also, a few questions for -users:
>
> * Who is using -3 in production now? How are you using it (load,
> use case, etc.) and what are your experiences?
>
> * Who is planning to use -3 soon? Why?
>
> * Who is not planning to use -3 soon? Why not?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham mnot@yahoo-inc.com
>

-- 
- Xenion - http://www.xenion.com.au/ - VPS Hosting - Commercial Squid Support -
- $25/pm entry-level VPSes w/ capped bandwidth charges available in WA -