directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Enrique Rodriguez" <>
Subject Re: [Fwd: svn commit: r408142 - in /directory/sandbox/erodriguez: configuration/ kerberos-sam/ preferences/ useradmin/]
Date Tue, 23 May 2006 19:11:35 GMT
On 5/23/06, Alex Karasulu <> wrote:
>     directory/sandbox/erodriguez/configuration/   (props changed)
>     directory/sandbox/erodriguez/kerberos-sam/   (props changed)
>     directory/sandbox/erodriguez/preferences/   (props changed)
>     directory/sandbox/erodriguez/useradmin/   (props changed)
> I should have been more explicit.  What I wanted you to explain was some
> of code movement you intended into Felix of preferences and other
> services.  However you never talked to this list about it.  The commit
> was in preparation for this work.  I know you're smart enough to
> understand why I initially brought up this particular commit.

Gotcha.  So, these modules breakdown into 2 groups, OSGi services and
Kerberos SAM:

1)  Regarding the OSGi services, I did bring this up publicly, but it
was so long ago that I'm not surprised if anyone forgot:

You can see there that on 7-DEC-2005 I brought up moving these
services to Felix and there were no comments so it was my
understanding that these services were OK to move to Felix now that we
have an OSGi project here at ASF.  I haven't moved them yet simply for
lack of bandwidth.

So, my updates to M2 POM's and svn:ignore's were actually clean-up
with no further "plan."  I did just happen to notice that they were
out-of-date w.r.t. general building.

2)  Regarding Kerberos SAM, I was asked about 2 weeks ago to lead the
standardization effort on behalf of OATH, w.r.t. pushing SAM through
the IETF.  However, I was waiting for a formal go-ahead signal and a
supposed kick-off conference call, but this hasn't been scheduled yet.
 Kerberos SAM is currently a stalled IETF draft.  It is harmless to
mainline it with the 1.1 branch, if that is preferable to having it in
my sandbox.  But, as I mentioned, it is only a draft and were we to
mainline it we would likely not see client support until later this
year and we would have deployed code that is backed by a draft that is
not assured to gain RFC status.

So, again, I don't have much of a plan here until I hear further
regarding the restart of a standardization process.

> There has been very little light shed on the work you've been doing on
> OSGi and you seem to be avoiding the topic.  I want it out in the open.

My OSGi efforts have been focused on the "Felix" project, which is
maybe why it appears I am avoiding the topic on the "Directory"
project.  W.r.t. these specific services I would like to continue
development as part of the Felix project.  Since they are written to
the JNDI interfaces, there is actually little effect on greater
ApacheDS development.

W.r.t. merging other OSGi work in the 1.1 branch I will be sure to
layout a plan shortly.  I did a flurry of work to get ApacheDS
assembling with Felix to get a demo together for JavaOne.  I apologize
for not having the time to detail my plan.

In short, much of my recent work has been to push along the Felix
project, at the Felix project, and to produce a working demo with
Felix for JavaOne.  Now that things are moving along nicely there, I
will have more bandwidth to deal with OSGi as it directly relates to


View raw message