Hi Torsten, On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 07:57:07PM +0100, Torsten Landschoff wrote: > As you are most probably aware there are quite some issues with OpenLDAP > in testing, which I'd like to summarize like this: > the version in sarge is obsolescent and not in releaseable shape > This is my fault as the maintainer. Major problem is the GnuTLS support > which was in 2.1.xx but is not as stable as I'd like it and does not > port easily to 2.2.x which is why I am currently rewriting it. > I know there is no way to change all of OpenLDAP that late in the release > process. Instead I'd like to propose the following: > - use the libraries from the old 2.1 series > - provide just the runtime library, the utils and the server from 2.2 > This has the following benefits: > a) we can use the OpenSSL support which is well tested and used all around > b) apart from the OpenLDAP packages nothing has to be changed > The downside: > a) upgrading from 2.1.x is not really tested and might not even work > at time of sarge release. Woody has 2.0.23-6.3 which should be fine > to upgrade to 2.2 > Please consider supporting this proposal. Preliminary packages for this > have been uploaded to experimental (2.1.30-5 is still building but will > be uploaded later). If it wasn't clear from my previous messages on the subject, I was speaking as a release manager when I approached Snow-Man about this matter on IRC. :) I rather think that uploading to experimental is overkill for what we're trying to accomplish here (i.e., fixing an RC bug for sarge). Unless you see some other fix for the RC bug that *doesn't* include bumping to OpenLDAP 2.2 (and both Stephen Frost and I have so far come up empty-handed), I think the OpenLDAP 2.2 upload should go directly to unstable according to the (carefully considered) plan that was proposed. I'm happy to review the packages prior to upload if you'd like. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature