Re: Fwd: Re: Plans for OpenLDAP 2.4?

[Aaron Richton <richton@nbcs.rutgers.edu>]

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.)