I've gone through and looked at all of the open issues that were in the
OpenLDAP product queue. The end result of this is that numerous duplicate
issues, invalid issues, and issues where we never got any response after
asking for more information have been closed out appropriately.
As a part of this I've gone through and marked many of the bugs with target
milestones and sometimes keywords.
Any issues with a target milestone of 2.5.0 and a keyword of OL_2_5_REQ is
an item that should likely be fixed for OpenLDAP 2.5. If it is not going
to be fixed for 2.5, then we need to come to a decision on what release
series we plan on fixing it in. I.e., I generally consider these high
priority items. Often these are things we've put off doing for 2.4 due to
disruption/incompatible API changes, etc, but are generally necessary for
the overall improvement of OpenLDAP. A number of these issues already have
patches. Some of them are documentation items that are likely not too hard
to deal with, and I've self-assigned many of those. There are a total of
175 items in this list:
Any issues with a target milestone of 2.5.0 but no keyword of OL_2_5_REQ
are items that need further review by other team members. I put items in
this category that seem of general interest, but may be more appropriate
for a later release, or perhaps remain unscheduled at this time. There are
188 issues in this list:
There is one open issue with the 2.4.50 milestone that I'll be taking care
All other issues I've left unassigned. This does not mean they have no
value, but they do not seem critical for the OpenLDAP 2.4.50 or 2.5
releases and can be re-examined at a later time.
All of this should help anyone who has expressed a desire in the past to
work with the project -- There is now a well sorted set of issues that need
addressing. Some of these items are fairly straight forward, especially
documentation updates. Feel free to sign up to gitlab, fork the repo, and
submit merge requests for issues to be reviewed. Please add any merge
request links to the related issue in the tracker as well.
Overall, given the list of items in the first category, I'm not sure the
2.5-odd/even track is the best route. I'm personally leaning more towards
2.5, 2.6, 2.7, etc, where each of these releases is of a short duration.
There seems to be enough work at this time to support more frequent minor
version releases and that would allow us to sucessively improve the
product. Having defined sets of issues for given target release milestones
should help significantly as far as planning and resource allocation is
Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: