On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 01:41:52 +0200 Jan Bergner <bergi@janbergner.de> wrote: > Sorry, if I am not familiar with the processes involved in packaging as > this is my first usage of the Debian reporting system. Thus, I also > apologize for the duplicate #878263, as I simply did not realize I do > not get replies to this issue, automatically. That's alright, I've closed that ticket, we can discuss here. > Given the circumstances, my next question would be how to continue at > this point. > > Personally, I would think that LDAP authentication would be a common > requirement, but this is not the definition of "reasonably popular". > So, how would this be evaluated? According to <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:ExtensionDistributor> this is the third most popular extension, so I think it meets the criteria of reasonably popular. > Furthermore, upstream support seems to have been dropped: > > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:LDAP_Authentication So I think the most important next step would be to find an upstream maintainer that is willing to provide security support for the length of the Debian release cycle. > Are you by any chance aware of any way to do LDAP authentication, that > is still supported? I'm not. The mediawiki-l mailing list (<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l>) would be a good place to ask. -- Kunal
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature