[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
severity of the problems (was: Slaves taking up 100% cpu)
Buchan Milne wrote:
So that makes 3 large distros the OpenLDAP team has failed to
communicate the severity of the problems with 2.1.22 to?
OSS authors - here the OpenLDAP team members - are *not* responsible to make
package maintainers aware of problems with software since it's not feasible
to track every package built out there. It's also meaningless to refer to
"large distros".
It must be the other way round: Every package maintainer is responsible to
monitor the announcements of the software he/she's packaging.
With web2ldap and python-ldap I have my own experiences with package
maintainers of "large distros". I'd suggest that you start your own OSS
project and we talk about the issues with package maintainers after a couple
of years. E.g. with web2ldap I'd even considered a license disallowing
packaging it. It caused nothing than grief with the users...
<sarcasm>OK, so we should ditch openldap, and find an alternative which
will support stable releases???</sarcasm>
Did you try to find an alternative? Do you mind sharing your findings?
After trying big commercial vendors I can say that the OpenLDAP support is
the most superior. The round-trip time of support requests and the knowledge
of the people providing support is fantastic compared to that of major
directory vendors.
And 2 months ago it said the same of 2.1.22, but that statement has not
been retracted, so are we to assume (without any other information) that
2.1.22 is stable, or not?
If your OpenLDAP server (or any other service you're running with any other
software) is really critical for you then you are responsible to stay tuned
with that product. Yes, this is significant work-load. For my part I'm
checking out OpenLDAP branches REL_ENG_2_1 and OPENLDAP_REL_ENG_2_2 from CVS
at a daily basis looking at the CHANGES files. If you are not capable or
willing to do that yourself you should hire somebody doing it for you.
Ciao, Michael.