From fk at fabiankeil.de  Thu Dec  4 12:33:08 2025
From: fk at fabiankeil.de (Fabian Keil)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2025 12:33:08 +0100
Subject: [Privoxy-devel] Release date for Privoxy 4.0.1 stable
Message-ID: <20251204123308.70b9bc35.fk@fabiankeil.de>

I'd like to announce Privoxy 4.0.1 stable before the end of the year.

There are no pending security fixes so the most important
change would be zstd decompression support.

It would be great if this could be enabled in all official binaries.

At least on my system the zstd usage seems to be behind brotli and gzip
but I expect this to change once more clients and servers support it:

fk at t520 ~ $grep "Header: scan: Content-Encoding" /usr/jails/privoxy-jail/var/log/privoxy/privoxy.log | cut -w -f 7 | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | column -t
2770  br
2146  gzip
171   zstd

Any comments or objections?

Fabian
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.privoxy.org/pipermail/privoxy-devel/attachments/20251204/7781cebd/attachment.bin>

From iansilvester at fastmail.fm  Thu Dec  4 13:09:48 2025
From: iansilvester at fastmail.fm (Ian Silvester)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2025 07:09:48 -0500
Subject: [Privoxy-devel] Release date for Privoxy 4.0.1 stable
In-Reply-To: <20251204123308.70b9bc35.fk@fabiankeil.de>
References: <20251204123308.70b9bc35.fk@fabiankeil.de>
Message-ID: <a45b295f-307a-4f8b-8c5d-14e0ec9370a3@app.fastmail.com>

Works for me. What are the requirements for supporting zstd? 


On Thu, 4 Dec 2025, at 06:33, Fabian Keil via Privoxy-devel wrote:
> I'd like to announce Privoxy 4.0.1 stable before the end of the year.
>
> There are no pending security fixes so the most important
> change would be zstd decompression support.
>
> It would be great if this could be enabled in all official binaries.
>
> At least on my system the zstd usage seems to be behind brotli and gzip
> but I expect this to change once more clients and servers support it:
>
> fk at t520 ~ $grep "Header: scan: Content-Encoding" 
> /usr/jails/privoxy-jail/var/log/privoxy/privoxy.log | cut -w -f 7 | 
> sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | column -t
> 2770  br
> 2146  gzip
> 171   zstd
>
> Any comments or objections?
>
> Fabian
>
> _______________________________________________
> Privoxy-devel mailing list
> Privoxy-devel at lists.privoxy.org
> https://lists.privoxy.org/mailman/listinfo/privoxy-devel

From fk at fabiankeil.de  Thu Dec  4 16:23:00 2025
From: fk at fabiankeil.de (Fabian Keil)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2025 16:23:00 +0100
Subject: [Privoxy-devel] Release date for Privoxy 4.0.1 stable
In-Reply-To: <a45b295f-307a-4f8b-8c5d-14e0ec9370a3@app.fastmail.com>
References: <20251204123308.70b9bc35.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <a45b295f-307a-4f8b-8c5d-14e0ec9370a3@app.fastmail.com>
Message-ID: <20251204162300.10760fe2.fk@fabiankeil.de>

"Ian Silvester" <iansilvester at fastmail.fm> wrote on 2025-12-04 at 07:09:48:

> Works for me. What are the requirements for supporting zstd? 

Great.

FEATURE_ZSTD depends on the zstd reference library [0] which
probably has to be bundled on OSX.

The relevant Privoxy commit is [1].

Fabian

[0] <https://facebook.github.io/zstd/>
[1] <https://www.privoxy.org/gitweb/?p=privoxy.git;a=commitdiff;h=15c91bb53616e74ddc33bcf3386611dbea31feeb>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.privoxy.org/pipermail/privoxy-devel/attachments/20251204/57e16a78/attachment.bin>

From roland at spinnaker.de  Fri Dec  5 11:48:37 2025
From: roland at spinnaker.de (Roland Rosenfeld)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2025 11:48:37 +0100
Subject: [Privoxy-devel] Release date for Privoxy 4.0.1 stable
In-Reply-To: <20251204123308.70b9bc35.fk@fabiankeil.de>
References: <20251204123308.70b9bc35.fk@fabiankeil.de>
Message-ID: <aTK4hZAfaTI3yJZI@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>

On Do, 04 Dez 2025, Fabian Keil via Privoxy-devel wrote:

> I'd like to announce Privoxy 4.0.1 stable before the end of the year.

Didn't we plan to go from 4.0 to 4.1 and use the third column only for
security/minor upgrades?
So I'd suggest, that we go to 4.1.0 instead of 4.0.1.

> There are no pending security fixes so the most important
> change would be zstd decompression support.

Thanks for heading this up.  I didn't notice this before and just
enabled it in the Debian build mechanisms.

> It would be great if this could be enabled in all official binaries.

Thumbs up.

> Any comments or objections?

No objections about the schedule, only about the version numbering.

Greetings
Roland
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.privoxy.org/pipermail/privoxy-devel/attachments/20251205/e8eee218/attachment.bin>

From fk at fabiankeil.de  Fri Dec  5 12:14:50 2025
From: fk at fabiankeil.de (Fabian Keil)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2025 12:14:50 +0100
Subject: [Privoxy-devel] Release date for Privoxy 4.1.0 stable
In-Reply-To: <aTK4hZAfaTI3yJZI@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>
References: <20251204123308.70b9bc35.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <aTK4hZAfaTI3yJZI@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>
Message-ID: <20251205121450.02203da8.fk@fabiankeil.de>

Roland Rosenfeld <roland at spinnaker.de> wrote on 2025-12-05 at 11:48:37:

> On Do, 04 Dez 2025, Fabian Keil via Privoxy-devel wrote:
> 
> > I'd like to announce Privoxy 4.0.1 stable before the end of the year.
> 
> Didn't we plan to go from 4.0 to 4.1 and use the third column only for
> security/minor upgrades?

Yes we did, good catch.

> So I'd suggest, that we go to 4.1.0 instead of 4.0.1.

The Privoxy version in git master has been 4.1.0 for a while now [0]
and I even looked at the version when writing my mail but apparently
got it wrong twice in a row anyway ...

>> There are no pending security fixes so the most important
>> change would be zstd decompression support.  
>
> Thanks for heading this up.  I didn't notice this before and just
> enabled it in the Debian build mechanisms.

Great. Thanks.

Fabian

[0] <https://www.privoxy.org/gitweb/?p=privoxy.git;a=commitdiff;h=c36e11b76bce84f2bcc0a9232a869b62e1afb36f>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.privoxy.org/pipermail/privoxy-devel/attachments/20251205/076c532e/attachment.bin>

From roland at spinnaker.de  Fri Dec  5 12:29:23 2025
From: roland at spinnaker.de (Roland Rosenfeld)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2025 12:29:23 +0100
Subject: [Privoxy-devel] Release date for Privoxy 4.1.0 stable
In-Reply-To: <20251205121450.02203da8.fk@fabiankeil.de>
References: <20251204123308.70b9bc35.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <aTK4hZAfaTI3yJZI@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>
 <20251205121450.02203da8.fk@fabiankeil.de>
Message-ID: <aTLCE44HYbH_mzVf@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>

On Fr, 05 Dez 2025, Fabian Keil via Privoxy-devel wrote:

> The Privoxy version in git master has been 4.1.0 for a while now [0]
> and I even looked at the version when writing my mail but apparently
> got it wrong twice in a row anyway ...

I also noticed this after writing my previous mail.
Maybe we should keep 4.1.0 as beta and release 4.2.0 as the new stable
(an alternative option would be 4.1.1 as stable, 4.2.0 feels better,
doesn't it?)

Greetings
Roland
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.privoxy.org/pipermail/privoxy-devel/attachments/20251205/062e0434/attachment.bin>

From fk at fabiankeil.de  Fri Dec  5 13:27:32 2025
From: fk at fabiankeil.de (Fabian Keil)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2025 13:27:32 +0100
Subject: [Privoxy-devel] Release date for Privoxy 4.1.0 stable
In-Reply-To: <aTLCE44HYbH_mzVf@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>
References: <20251204123308.70b9bc35.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <aTK4hZAfaTI3yJZI@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>
 <20251205121450.02203da8.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <aTLCE44HYbH_mzVf@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>
Message-ID: <20251205132732.1b99ffcb.fk@fabiankeil.de>

Roland Rosenfeld <roland at spinnaker.de> wrote on 2025-12-05 at 12:29:23:

> On Fr, 05 Dez 2025, Fabian Keil via Privoxy-devel wrote:
> 
> > The Privoxy version in git master has been 4.1.0 for a while now [0]
> > and I even looked at the version when writing my mail but apparently
> > got it wrong twice in a row anyway ...
> 
> I also noticed this after writing my previous mail.
> Maybe we should keep 4.1.0 as beta and release 4.2.0 as the new stable

Do you propose that we create an actual 4.1.0 beta release (tag, test,
build packages, send out the announcement, update the RSS feed etc.),
wait a while and then release 4.2.0 stable with basically the same
code plus eventual fixes?

We did beta releases like this in the past but stopped doing
so because it wasn't obvious that it was worth the trouble.

> (an alternative option would be 4.1.1 as stable, 4.2.0 feels better,
> doesn't it?)

Releasing 4.1.1 stable next without having released (announced etc.) an
actual 4.1.0 version might confuse users, though.

Currently the developer manual explains that "Y, the version minor,
is increased for every release except for pure bug fix releases in
which case only Z, the point or sub version, is increased.".

Technically it doesn't say by how much Y is increased so I suppose
releasing 4.2.0 stable after 4.0.0 stable wouldn't be against the
rule ...

Fabian
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.privoxy.org/pipermail/privoxy-devel/attachments/20251205/e28e644e/attachment-0001.bin>

From iansilvester at fastmail.fm  Fri Dec  5 13:53:15 2025
From: iansilvester at fastmail.fm (Ian Silvester)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2025 07:53:15 -0500
Subject: [Privoxy-devel] Release date for Privoxy 4.1.0 stable
In-Reply-To: <20251205132732.1b99ffcb.fk@fabiankeil.de>
References: <20251204123308.70b9bc35.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <aTK4hZAfaTI3yJZI@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>
 <20251205121450.02203da8.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <aTLCE44HYbH_mzVf@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>
 <20251205132732.1b99ffcb.fk@fabiankeil.de>
Message-ID: <54f51474-a40d-416a-9b49-dc072a8dedb6@app.fastmail.com>

To me it depends upon the complexity of adding zstd support. If you feel there's a risk of breakage with that enabled then a beta release has value, but if the addition is simple and clean then 4.1.0 stable makes more sense. 

On Fri, 5 Dec 2025, at 07:27, Fabian Keil via Privoxy-devel wrote:
> Roland Rosenfeld <roland at spinnaker.de> wrote on 2025-12-05 at 12:29:23:
>
>> On Fr, 05 Dez 2025, Fabian Keil via Privoxy-devel wrote:
>> 
>> > The Privoxy version in git master has been 4.1.0 for a while now [0]
>> > and I even looked at the version when writing my mail but apparently
>> > got it wrong twice in a row anyway ...
>> 
>> I also noticed this after writing my previous mail.
>> Maybe we should keep 4.1.0 as beta and release 4.2.0 as the new stable
>
> Do you propose that we create an actual 4.1.0 beta release (tag, test,
> build packages, send out the announcement, update the RSS feed etc.),
> wait a while and then release 4.2.0 stable with basically the same
> code plus eventual fixes?
>
> We did beta releases like this in the past but stopped doing
> so because it wasn't obvious that it was worth the trouble.
>
>> (an alternative option would be 4.1.1 as stable, 4.2.0 feels better,
>> doesn't it?)
>
> Releasing 4.1.1 stable next without having released (announced etc.) an
> actual 4.1.0 version might confuse users, though.
>
> Currently the developer manual explains that "Y, the version minor,
> is increased for every release except for pure bug fix releases in
> which case only Z, the point or sub version, is increased.".
>
> Technically it doesn't say by how much Y is increased so I suppose
> releasing 4.2.0 stable after 4.0.0 stable wouldn't be against the
> rule ...
>
> Fabian
>
> _______________________________________________
> Privoxy-devel mailing list
> Privoxy-devel at lists.privoxy.org
> https://lists.privoxy.org/mailman/listinfo/privoxy-devel

From roland at spinnaker.de  Fri Dec  5 20:14:56 2025
From: roland at spinnaker.de (Roland Rosenfeld)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2025 20:14:56 +0100
Subject: [Privoxy-devel] Release date for Privoxy 4.1.0 stable
In-Reply-To: <20251205132732.1b99ffcb.fk@fabiankeil.de>
References: <20251204123308.70b9bc35.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <aTK4hZAfaTI3yJZI@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>
 <20251205121450.02203da8.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <aTLCE44HYbH_mzVf@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>
 <20251205132732.1b99ffcb.fk@fabiankeil.de>
Message-ID: <aTMvMKxyu9j2UUd-@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>

On Fr, 05 Dez 2025, Fabian Keil via Privoxy-devel wrote:

> > I also noticed this after writing my previous mail.
> > Maybe we should keep 4.1.0 as beta and release 4.2.0 as the new stable

> Do you propose that we create an actual 4.1.0 beta release (tag, test,
> build packages, send out the announcement, update the RSS feed etc.),
> wait a while and then release 4.2.0 stable with basically the same
> code plus eventual fixes?

I had in mind, that we skipped the version number, that was used as
beta before.  But this was in the very early days (3.0.5 beta, 3.0.6
stable, 3.0.7 beta,...)
We changed this to only replace "UNRELEASED" by "stable" and we are
done.
So let us just do so and use 4.1.0.
Sorry for confusion, that was my fault.

Greetings
Roland
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.privoxy.org/pipermail/privoxy-devel/attachments/20251205/8e403e0e/attachment.bin>

From ler762 at gmail.com  Sat Dec  6 16:54:37 2025
From: ler762 at gmail.com (Lee)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2025 10:54:37 -0500
Subject: [Privoxy-devel] Release date for Privoxy 4.0.1 stable
In-Reply-To: <20251204123308.70b9bc35.fk@fabiankeil.de>
References: <20251204123308.70b9bc35.fk@fabiankeil.de>
Message-ID: <CAD8GWss-wavq8fSMkUoo3qBSiRtUtUmQ=5pRhEs+FVxzAa399w@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Dec 4, 2025 at 6:35?AM Fabian Keil via Privoxy-devel
<privoxy-devel at lists.privoxy.org> wrote:
>
> I'd like to announce Privoxy 4.0.1 stable before the end of the year.

OK with me.

It would be nice if someone with a Windows 11 machine would build
Privoxy for Windows.   Microsoft dropped support for Windows 10 back
in mid-October and I switched everything except one desktop PC to
Debian.  So I can  build Privoxy for Windows but the build is going to
happen on an unsupported W10 OS.

Lee

From fk at fabiankeil.de  Sat Dec  6 18:08:33 2025
From: fk at fabiankeil.de (Fabian Keil)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2025 18:08:33 +0100
Subject: [Privoxy-devel] Release date for Privoxy 4.1.0 stable
In-Reply-To: <54f51474-a40d-416a-9b49-dc072a8dedb6@app.fastmail.com>
References: <20251204123308.70b9bc35.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <aTK4hZAfaTI3yJZI@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>
 <20251205121450.02203da8.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <aTLCE44HYbH_mzVf@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>
 <20251205132732.1b99ffcb.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <54f51474-a40d-416a-9b49-dc072a8dedb6@app.fastmail.com>
Message-ID: <20251206180833.7d484f2e.fk@fabiankeil.de>

"Ian Silvester" <iansilvester at fastmail.fm> wrote on 2025-12-05 at 07:53:15:

> To me it depends upon the complexity of adding zstd support.
> If you feel there's a risk of breakage with that enabled then
> a beta release has value, but if the addition is simple and
> clean then 4.1.0 stable makes more sense. 

The FEATURE_ZSTD code is very similar to the FEATURE_BROTLI code.
The main difference is that another external library is being used.

While there is always a "risk of breakage" I don't see the need for
a Privoxy beta release cycle here and haven't even marked the feature
as experimental.

Fabian
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.privoxy.org/pipermail/privoxy-devel/attachments/20251206/9f5635a0/attachment.bin>

From fk at fabiankeil.de  Sat Dec  6 18:12:58 2025
From: fk at fabiankeil.de (Fabian Keil)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2025 18:12:58 +0100
Subject: [Privoxy-devel] Release date for Privoxy 4.1.0 stable
In-Reply-To: <aTMvMKxyu9j2UUd-@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>
References: <20251204123308.70b9bc35.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <aTK4hZAfaTI3yJZI@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>
 <20251205121450.02203da8.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <aTLCE44HYbH_mzVf@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>
 <20251205132732.1b99ffcb.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <aTMvMKxyu9j2UUd-@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>
Message-ID: <20251206181258.103212bf.fk@fabiankeil.de>

Roland Rosenfeld <roland at spinnaker.de> wrote on 2025-12-05 at 20:14:56:

> On Fr, 05 Dez 2025, Fabian Keil via Privoxy-devel wrote:
> 
> > > I also noticed this after writing my previous mail.
> > > Maybe we should keep 4.1.0 as beta and release 4.2.0 as the new stable
> 
> > Do you propose that we create an actual 4.1.0 beta release (tag, test,
> > build packages, send out the announcement, update the RSS feed etc.),
> > wait a while and then release 4.2.0 stable with basically the same
> > code plus eventual fixes?
> 
> I had in mind, that we skipped the version number, that was used as
> beta before.  But this was in the very early days (3.0.5 beta, 3.0.6
> stable, 3.0.7 beta,...)
> We changed this to only replace "UNRELEASED" by "stable" and we are
> done.
> So let us just do so and use 4.1.0.
> Sorry for confusion, that was my fault.

No problem. Thanks for the clarification.

Fabian
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.privoxy.org/pipermail/privoxy-devel/attachments/20251206/461aa752/attachment.bin>

From fk at fabiankeil.de  Sat Dec  6 18:26:48 2025
From: fk at fabiankeil.de (Fabian Keil)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2025 18:26:48 +0100
Subject: [Privoxy-devel] Release date for Privoxy 4.1.0 stable
In-Reply-To: <CAD8GWss-wavq8fSMkUoo3qBSiRtUtUmQ=5pRhEs+FVxzAa399w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20251204123308.70b9bc35.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <CAD8GWss-wavq8fSMkUoo3qBSiRtUtUmQ=5pRhEs+FVxzAa399w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20251206182648.073ba619.fk@fabiankeil.de>

Lee <ler762 at gmail.com> wrote on 2025-12-06 at 10:54:37:

> On Thu, Dec 4, 2025 at 6:35?AM Fabian Keil via Privoxy-devel
> <privoxy-devel at lists.privoxy.org> wrote:
> >
> > I'd like to announce Privoxy 4.0.1 stable before the end of the year.
> 
> OK with me.

Great.

I take it you mainly approve the release date and are fine with
using 4.1.0 as the version as well.

> It would be nice if someone with a Windows 11 machine would build
> Privoxy for Windows.

In my opinion it would be even nicer if someone would cross-build
Privoxy for Windows on a free operating system in a reproducible
fashion.

>                      Microsoft dropped support for Windows 10 back
> in mid-October and I switched everything except one desktop PC to
> Debian.  So I can  build Privoxy for Windows but the build is going to
> happen on an unsupported W10 OS.

Thanks for disclosing this.

While building on an unsupported OS may not be ideal, it seems a lot
better to me than having no official Windows binaries at all and I
doubt we'll find a trusted person who can build on Windows 11 before
the next release.

Fabian
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.privoxy.org/pipermail/privoxy-devel/attachments/20251206/d2b380a0/attachment.bin>

From iansilvester at fastmail.fm  Sat Dec  6 19:37:26 2025
From: iansilvester at fastmail.fm (Ian Silvester)
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2025 13:37:26 -0500
Subject: [Privoxy-devel] Release date for Privoxy 4.1.0 stable
In-Reply-To: <20251206180833.7d484f2e.fk@fabiankeil.de>
References: <20251204123308.70b9bc35.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <aTK4hZAfaTI3yJZI@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>
 <20251205121450.02203da8.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <aTLCE44HYbH_mzVf@dinghy.sail.spinnaker.de>
 <20251205132732.1b99ffcb.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <54f51474-a40d-416a-9b49-dc072a8dedb6@app.fastmail.com>
 <20251206180833.7d484f2e.fk@fabiankeil.de>
Message-ID: <545f3731-5044-46fb-b6c3-78cd14e35614@app.fastmail.com>



On Sat, 6 Dec 2025, at 12:08, Fabian Keil via Privoxy-devel wrote:
> "Ian Silvester" <iansilvester at fastmail.fm> wrote on 2025-12-05 at 07:53:15:
>
>> To me it depends upon the complexity of adding zstd support.
>> If you feel there's a risk of breakage with that enabled then
>> a beta release has value, but if the addition is simple and
>> clean then 4.1.0 stable makes more sense. 
>
> The FEATURE_ZSTD code is very similar to the FEATURE_BROTLI code.
> The main difference is that another external library is being used.
>
> While there is always a "risk of breakage" I don't see the need for
> a Privoxy beta release cycle here and haven't even marked the feature
> as experimental.
>
> Fabian

Ok, then I support 4.1.0 stable. 

Ian

>
> _______________________________________________
> Privoxy-devel mailing list
> Privoxy-devel at lists.privoxy.org
> https://lists.privoxy.org/mailman/listinfo/privoxy-devel

From ler762 at gmail.com  Sun Dec  7 21:20:37 2025
From: ler762 at gmail.com (Lee)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2025 15:20:37 -0500
Subject: [Privoxy-devel] Release date for Privoxy 4.1.0 stable
In-Reply-To: <20251206182648.073ba619.fk@fabiankeil.de>
References: <20251204123308.70b9bc35.fk@fabiankeil.de>
 <CAD8GWss-wavq8fSMkUoo3qBSiRtUtUmQ=5pRhEs+FVxzAa399w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20251206182648.073ba619.fk@fabiankeil.de>
Message-ID: <CAD8GWsvZG2P4ADpCzHXEpVg5ghynvh4tWL2=BJtFmJHbrODz-A@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Dec 6, 2025 at 12:26?PM Fabian Keil via Privoxy-devel wrote:
>
> Lee  wrote on 2025-12-06 at 10:54:37:
>
> > On Thu, Dec 4, 2025 at 6:35?AM Fabian Keil via Privoxy-devel
> > <privoxy-devel at lists.privoxy.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'd like to announce Privoxy 4.0.1 stable before the end of the year.
> >
> > OK with me.
>
> Great.
>
> I take it you mainly approve the release date and are fine with
> using 4.1.0 as the version as well.

Yes.

> > It would be nice if someone with a Windows 11 machine would build
> > Privoxy for Windows.
>
> In my opinion it would be even nicer if someone would cross-build
> Privoxy for Windows on a free operating system in a reproducible
> fashion.

If someone else was doing the cross-build, maybe..
You'd still need someone with a windows 11 machine to test the new
build of privoxy.  Which isn't all that bad, but whoever is doing the
cross-build would also have to cross-build all the libraries - which
is a pain.  For whatever reason the brotli 1.2.0 library now requires
'cmake  -DBUILD_SHARED_LIBS=off' and I'm not at all clear about the
zstd documentation talking about "by default the dynamic library is
multithreaded and static library is single-threaded."  Is that going
to be a problem for privoxy?  I dunno, but at least privoxy hasn't
blown up yet.

Regards,
Lee


>
> >                      Microsoft dropped support for Windows 10 back
> > in mid-October and I switched everything except one desktop PC to
> > Debian.  So I can  build Privoxy for Windows but the build is going to
> > happen on an unsupported W10 OS.
>
> Thanks for disclosing this.
>
> While building on an unsupported OS may not be ideal, it seems a lot
> better to me than having no official Windows binaries at all and I
> doubt we'll find a trusted person who can build on Windows 11 before
> the next release.
>
> Fabian
> _______________________________________________
> Privoxy-devel mailing list
> Privoxy-devel at lists.privoxy.org
> https://lists.privoxy.org/mailman/listinfo/privoxy-devel