Ok let me try to clarify below ...
On 9/22/07, Emmanuel Lecharny <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Just to clarify my proposal : I just want Kerberos to be clearly
separated from apacheds, as is daemon, shaed and installers.
Yep I understand that. But when you create another subproject it's like another offering of a product
that is voted upon etc. We must be able to support that product in the same manner that we support
the server or studio for example. Doing so is more than just a matter of project organization in this
sense. You're telling users that we're open for business and we simply are not. Look at the situation
we had with the guy who inquired about DNS. No one could help him.
As djencks said in another thread - I did not review a patch request. This however is different from
turning back users. A dev issue can wait but the project really looks bad when we tell users sorry
that functionality we advertise is really unsupported and no one can help you with it. Plus you have
more users than developers waiting on feedback.
The fact that there is not enough community does not have anything to
do with it, being part of apacheds or not won't help at all to gather
some new committers around it. However, it can still be a plugin, but
I would like it to be less tighly coupled with apacheds.
I must admit I don't understand your -1.
Does it make more sense now?