Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-trafficserver-users-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-trafficserver-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 411D49189 for ; Thu, 5 Apr 2012 04:18:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 66661 invoked by uid 500); 5 Apr 2012 04:18:29 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-trafficserver-users-archive@trafficserver.apache.org Received: (qmail 66605 invoked by uid 500); 5 Apr 2012 04:18:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@trafficserver.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@trafficserver.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@trafficserver.apache.org Received: (qmail 66581 invoked by uid 99); 5 Apr 2012 04:18:27 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 05 Apr 2012 04:18:27 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of ming.zym@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.170 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.210.170] (HELO mail-iy0-f170.google.com) (209.85.210.170) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 05 Apr 2012 04:18:21 +0000 Received: by iaeh11 with SMTP id h11so1491385iae.29 for ; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 21:18:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :content-type:x-mailer:mime-version; bh=lcTzq59Qqm4IWExEd+91WrMj2rztUh4x5TUJfDOdq08=; b=T+XsqxIq19w/XJ6Z8liY4roVx6s1cAgjZvF0e46o+t8+JdSGDZoWJfbl2mfr+QPAoA W/EIWh/MaCo6AjKQ5ZPw/Lx21ypEWCD0e8q5GHAY8yzxqJenszEVVn/OdsgtC3fTrhUo h997wIDflZPGUrqGCYwL6evcavHK3wcd4sunqjR1Gdx0gvU9TA/kUPNn/ooWZEzNYWj3 u+13wa4A9JNelIIvItUdayeYpEUULdJBA5bOllwOqQFwGwlmmaRmzwjPWCTB+JQwZWGa pp0b7HIO1ybv/VPqTmeRD0B3eMS51e0WFltmGIkVvrj8hLR3O/06Oq0zqkKbs9myd5Tf ThrQ== Received: by 10.50.209.105 with SMTP id ml9mr685355igc.23.1333599480963; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 21:18:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.32.102.8] ([182.92.247.2]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id hq3sm12702322igc.0.2012.04.04.21.17.57 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 04 Apr 2012 21:17:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1333599463.3458.3.camel@zym6400> Subject: Re: does anyone out there use traffic_shell From: "ming.zym@gmail.com" To: dev@trafficserver.apache.org Cc: users@trafficserver.apache.org Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2012 12:17:43 +0800 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-0SuV1QWKHV/gF32fMcjT" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --=-0SuV1QWKHV/gF32fMcjT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable YES, we do have some users interest in the traffic_shell, I think we can hold back for sometime. :D + 1 for leave it there =E5=9C=A8 2012-04-04=E4=B8=89=E7=9A=84 20:44 -0700=EF=BC=8CJames Peach=E5= =86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A > Hi all, >=20 > In various IRC conversations, the opinion has been expressed that no-one = uses traffic_shell and that it should be removed. If people use it and like= it, then we can work on improving it and fixing some bugs, otherwise I wil= l propose that we deprecate it in 3.2 and remove it thereafter. >=20 > J --=20 zym, Zhao Yongming. aka: yonghao @ taobao.com --=-0SuV1QWKHV/gF32fMcjT Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) iF4EABEIAAYFAk99HPIACgkQQBjU8JUwVz5FtgD+MR8c7uoOozZ3XGJpmHyBgqrk 2paTXT8U6R82lbu9nB4A/iv2LMkS3IF5iUUH9DsXBSp01IRr/Mo0iXNI7QyTPD4t =wbul -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-0SuV1QWKHV/gF32fMcjT--