Re: Proposed focus for Squid-6

On 6/30/20 6:59 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> I have been asked a few weeks ago about what the "goal for Squid-6" is
> going to be.

What does it mean to claim that "Squid v6 goal is X"? Does "reaching X"
become a precondition for the v6 release? Something else? Our RoadMap
page talks of _features_ (with specific properties) driving release
process, not goals. I assume the two concepts are different, but I do
not know what the term "goal" really means here.

Does the paragraph quoted below represent a complete answer to my
question or just a partial description of what we are trying to define here?

> It just gives people some rough direction to
> consider when struggling with selecting of new work to start.

IMHO, Squid work selection should be primarily driven by
developer-specific factors that usually have little to do with
Project-declared release goals, whatever they are.

Until the meaning of "release goal" is clear to me, I can only comment
on the validity of the proposed goals from a general "What is a good
goal in a software development project?" point of view. Please do not
misinterpret my responses below as an agreement (or disagreement)
regarding adding those items as v6 release goals.

As of now, I see no reason to have release goals other than the already
established practice of tracking TODO features on the RoadMap. I am very
open to changing my position, but that change would require developing a
shared definition of the term "release goal". Hence my question above...


> The last few version we have focused on C++11 optimizations and code
> upgrades. 

I do not think this summary is meaningful or accurate, but it is a
matter of opinion/perspective.


> 0) the ongoing project to clarify OS support and testing.

I would support that project if you replace "clarify" with "define" or
something similarly meaningful/measurable.


> 1) remove features that have been deprecated since Squid-3 days.

This goal needs polishing: All such features? Some features we agree on
(e.g., the two you listed explicitly -- WAIS and ICP)? What determines
that feature F has been deprecated "since v3 days"?


> 2) proposing some next features to be removed ASAP, possibly removing
> them this release.
>  - send-announce removal
>  - SMB_LM helper removal

This needs to be rephrased as a meaningful goal. Perhaps you meant
"Removal of the following features: ..."? If yes, we need to make a
decision for each feature. It is not clear (to me) whether the two
specific examples have something in common here.


> 3) drop (all?) bitrotten code

Even with "all" in place, this is not a valid goal due to the vagueness
of the term "bitrotten code".


> 4) statistic addition to measure feature use. To improve admin ability
> to answer our "are you using this feature" requests.

I think Squid usage reporting would be a very nice feature (at virtually
any granularity) _if_ we have enough admin support to enable such
reporting by default. Perhaps we should ask on squid-users first?


HTH,

Alex.
_______________________________________________
squid-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-dev