Any thoughts on adding libldif as an installed library? I don't see it having any particular stability impact for our code, but it may give packagers a bit of heartburn if we add a new library in the middle of a release stream.
re: MozNSS multi-init support - we have already been rolling the MozNSS code into RE24, but we've been omitting the configure switches for it because the code is still incomplete. Multi-init is one of the key features needed before this code will be safe for use by general applications. The issue of ciphersuite management still needs to be addressed as well. (The current code is usable, under very controlled circumstances...)
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Plans for OpenLDAP 2.4? Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 15:38:17 -0600 From: Rich Megginson rmeggins@redhat.com Organization: Sec Eng (Directory Server) To: Howard Chu hyc@symas.com
Howard Chu wrote:
Rich Megginson wrote:
Do you have a date after which 2.4 branch development will be closed for new enhancements? We have 2 more features which we would like to get into OpenLDAP in order to be able to use it in our projects:
- support for NSS multi-init - the guy working on this has a prototype
working and has submitted the code to NSS upstream - no ETA yet 2) support for libldif
How much time do we have in order to get these features into the 2.4 branch?
It seems like we can add both of those without destabilizing any of the existing code, so it should be OK. A 2.4.18 release candidate is being tested now so it's probably too late for this cut. I'll raise this question on the openldap-devel list.
Ok. Thanks.
On Mon, 31 Aug 2009, Howard Chu wrote:
Any thoughts on adding libldif as an installed library? I don't see it having any particular stability impact for our code, but it may give packagers a bit of heartburn if we add a new library in the middle of a release stream.
I don't think it's going to matter unless there's a pre-existing libldif that's part of a major distro (even then, it shouldn't matter, but it would be a bit of thought on packagers' heads). If you really want to go for painless, require libldif (dynamically of course) to the existing libs so old apps don't need to be relinked: perhaps the time to change that particular aspect would be RE25. This of course assumes no ABI changes, but it doesn't sound like those are on the table yet? (Of course the dynamic linker/performance guys would love for you to break them out now with lazy loading, but It's Worked For Years so deferring in the name of compatibility makes sense IMO.)
-
Aaron Richton -
Howard Chu