ldap

[Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca>]

So what the heck is up with LDAP?

The currect situation seems to be incredibly confusing for users who have
no idea how to get mod_auth_ldap or how to use it.

In my opinion, it should either be properly maintained and released, or it
should be removed (to sourceforge or wherever).

Joshua.

Re: ldap

[Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm>]

john@sterls.com wrote:

> People didn't want it to be a part of the core more because of module bloat.
>  As Aaron says, there is no reason to add all these modules to the core
> only to have to release them on the same schedule - I like it as a sub project.

When proxy was a subproject, it received no exposure, which was 
detrimental to the project as a whole. Bugs were only fixed when proxy 
went mainstream again. Subprojects mean more work for end-users, and 
avoiding end-user work is better than avoiding developer work.

Regards,
Graham
-- 
-----------------------------------------
minfrin@sharp.fm 
	"There's a moon
					over Bourbon Street
						tonight..."

Re: ldap

[jo...@sterls.com]

>-- Original Message --
>Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
>Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 20:33:02 +0200
>From: Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm>
>Subject: Re: ldap
>
>mod_ldap* was supposed to be part of v2.0, but happened too close to GA

>for people to feel comfortable with it's stability. It looks like people
>would be happier for it to go in v2.1.

Thats not how I remember it.  When it was introduced to CVS many people
expressed discontent, and stated that they would have vetoed the addition
if there had been a vote.  I don't remember it being a temporary thing at
all, and introducing it again (without a vote) will probably create the
same situation.

People didn't want it to be a part of the core more because of module bloat.
 As Aaron says, there is no reason to add all these modules to the core
only to have to release them on the same schedule - I like it as a sub project.

sterling

Re: ldap

[Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm>]

Joshua Slive wrote:

> So what the heck is up with LDAP?
> 
> The currect situation seems to be incredibly confusing for users who have
> no idea how to get mod_auth_ldap or how to use it.

mod_ldap* was supposed to be part of v2.0, but happened too close to GA 
for people to feel comfortable with it's stability. It looks like people 
would be happier for it to go in v2.1.

As to the confusion, how about adding a README file?

Regards,
Graham
-- 
-----------------------------------------
minfrin@sharp.fm 
	"There's a moon
					over Bourbon Street
						tonight..."