httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jess Holle <>
Subject Re: [STATUS] (httpd-2.0) Wed Mar 9 23:45:36 2005
Date Fri, 11 Mar 2005 02:57:42 GMT
Shannon Eric Peevey wrote:

> Brad Nicholes wrote:
>>    For 2.0 auth_ldap and mod_ldap it will probably forever remain
>> experimental.  There have been a lot of changes that have gone into the
>> 2.1 version that IMO allowed it to graduate from experimental to a
>> standard module.  Most of these patches will never be backported to 2.0.
>>  In fact Josh's patch will probably not be backported (although it is
>> simple enough that it could be) simply because the two code bases have
>> become so different that it is difficult to backport anything.  In most
>> cases a backport is actually a rewrite.     For this reason, I am ++1 
>> for any effort to get 2.1/2.2 to BETA and
>> released.  Even if the latest "Multiple AAA provider" discussion has to
>> wait for 2.4.  We need exposure for the new authnz_ldap and util_ldap
>> modules as well as the new auth module structure itself.
> Hi, y'all,
> Sorry, if I have missed this discussion, but what is the status going 
> to be of 2.0 then.  Will any patches be backported into 2.0's 
> mod_auth_ldap to fix various problems, or should I ask folks to hold 
> off on a migration from 1.3 to 2.0, until we have 2.2 stable?  (The 
> migration being for made for the use of mod_auth_ldap). 

It is this sort of question that should be answered by properly labeling 
2.0's LDAP modules according the majority consensus of those using them.

Personally, I feel that they're pretty stable in 2.0.53.  Josh's patch 
and the LDAP connection timeout patch both round out the picture in 
their own way and would be good to get into 2.0.54, but I would consider 
the LDAP modules stable even without them.

Jess Holle

View raw message