Nick Kew wrote:
+1 to taking time for this. But at the moment we're in danger of doing a rushed/botched job on a get-it-out-for-httpd-2.2.9 agenda. That's basically because noone has been thinking of 1.3 as a release candidate until the last couple of weeks, so we haven't given sufficient thought to loose ends.
One more thought; if Jim in anxious to roll and we need to roll 1.2.x that's fine by me. With httpd-2.0, I had patched apu-config to report ldap bindings entirely separately from the core bindings. That worked great, because next to nothing was abstracted, and mod_ldap/util_ldap alone were bound to the ldap bindings. The various support/ tools and core httpd loaded just fine without all the cruft. With httpd-2.2 and apr-1, this is now impossible, so I consider 2.2 to be essentially broken for practical purposes (except for rolling it on each and every machine individually). It's really somewhat shabby. So I don't have any opinion on a 2.2.9 without apr-1.3.0 + dynamic ldap. If folks want it now, great. I'm only keen to rip these direct bindings out of httpd, and even out of the core of apu, leaving us with a very clean server until a user actually uses ldap auth modules, and a release of 1.2.x is no skin off my back. Do folks feel we should release "an apr+apu" this friday? If 1.3.0 has settled in, then that is the release. If not, a final 1.2.x release instead, in the interim? Bill
