Luigi Gangitano wrote on 25/04/2006 14:19: > > Il giorno 25/apr/06, alle ore 13:57, Sven Mueller ha scritto: >>>Luigi Gangitano wrote on 25/04/2006 01:32: >>> >>>>So I'm packaging Squid-3.0 from new sources (using CDBS for the first >>>>time, great!). The resulting packages will be named 'squid3, squid3- >>>>common, squid3-client, squid3-cgi' and will conflict with the >>>>existing squid packages. >>> >>>Why do you conflict? Would squid3 require such big changes to make it >>>installable side-by-side with the squid 2.5 packages? Wouldn't it make >>>sense to allow as many people as possible to test it with their >>>production squid (2.5) still available? > > Whould you really use your production machine to test some > experimental software? Some people don't have much of a choice there (budget constraints, floor/rack space etc.). And there isn't too much contradicting such practice if the "experimental" software doesn't conflict (in some way, not necessarily the "Conflicts:" Debian meaning) with the production software. It actually is quite common to do that, even though it is not what the admins in question would like best. >>>Note that I do realize that you would need to revert any such changes >>>once squid3 becomes stable (and a possible upgrade from 2.5). I'm just >>>wondering wether the changes were so big that this is infeasible. > > Changes are not that big. But since squid 2.5 would still be > available and reverting to it is a simple 'uninstall squid3 and > reinstall squid' operation that doesn't impact configuration files > and the caches, I don't see why it's needed to keep them separated. Well, I gave one reason: People might want to test it alongside with a production squid still running. I see a small number of problems with that though. Especially if people choose to run squid3 (the version I suggested which is installable alongside squid_2.5) as their production proxy, they would need to change configuration to switch to the squid package once squid3 is stable and gets renamed. However, I would still consider it favorable to make squid3 installable with squid(2.5) still running. The possible benefits by a larger number of installations are bigger (IMHO) then the drawbacks. cu, sven
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature