apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sander Striker <s.stri...@striker.nl>
Subject Re: [VOTE] LDAP in APR 2.x?
Date Tue, 24 Mar 2009 11:47:41 GMT
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Graham Leggett <minfrin@sharp.fm> wrote:
> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>> Of course not, that's why I posted.
>> The clear consensus here in the room is that the current approach to
>> LDAP is broken and ill thought-out (for the reasons I illuminated),
>> but what there isn't consensus on is how to proceed.  Hence, the
>> discussion on-list about how to proceed.  -- justin
> Votes follow the discussion, they don't precede it.

They can start one, witness this thread.  When there is a general idea
that consensus is around the corner, but to not just do it, I think
it's perfectly valid to open like this.

> What is clear is that there is a wide lack of understanding of how the IETF
> draft LDAP C API works, and before people can suggest possible solutions,
> first everyone needs to fully understand the problem they are trying to
> solve.

This is about how technology X (read: LDAP) is wrapped in apr-util,
not about how LDAP works or what problems it addresses.



> Regards,
> Graham
> --

View raw message