Re: Squid 1.2

A.R. Cache Op wrote:
>
> How are things going with Squid 1.2 ?

Fine, fine. It called the other day, just to let us know how it was
getting on. I really don't think it's dressing warmly enough,
personally...but you know how it is with these youngsters.

> Any idea on a date for a 'release' version ?

I think it's a little too young to go on a _real_ date, yet...but I'm
sure we'll see it at the family picnic.

> Our main proxy awaits an upgrade and hopefully we can do the
> Squid 1.2 and new machine thing at the same time.
>
> Is 1.2.beta22 reliable enough ? I note our upstream is using
> it, so I suppose we are buy default.

Well, that depends on your personal definition of 'reliable enough'. I
have two installations where the answer is 'yes' and the people rejoice
and are happy. Of the others, though, I would have my testicles dragged
through peruvian irrigation canals filled with lemon-juice and vinegar
in little barbed-wire harnesses within an hour, if I installed it at
those sites.

Obviously, there is some significant variation in tolerable
'reliability'. 1.2.beta22 still has bugs. The 'beta' bit is a _big_
clue. It depends on exactly what you do with it and how as to whether
you tickle the bugs or not, and if/when it crashes, fails or fatally
reformats the solar system whether you find those consequences
acceptable.

If you _do_ choose to run it though, you will be nice and send us lots
of detailed bug-reports though, won't you?

D

-- 
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GAT d- s++: a C++++$ UL++++B+++S+++C++H++U++V+++$ P+++$ L+++ E-
W+++(--)$ N++ w++$>--- t+ 5++ X+() R+ tv b++++ DI+++ e- h-@ 
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------