Agreed, and interested in other thoughts as well. Brad
Brad Nicholes Senior Software Engineer Novell, Inc., the leading provider of Net business solutions http://www.novell.com >>> Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Monday, June 28, 2004 11:23:57 AM >>> Brad Nicholes wrote: > I was hoping to avoid the MMN bump mainly because that means we can't > backport the changes to the 2.0 branch. If the httpd 2.2 includes a > caching_util module then the only reason for these stabilization patches > is the 2.0 branch. Also, if there are any other modules that do depend > on util_ldap, wouldn't they be just as broken as mod_auth_ldap was and > probably want to update anyway? I don't know, I was hoping to get some > other feedback from the list. Well... the question is are there modules out there that use util_ldap right now? I think being experimental, the module is subject to incompatible change anyway, and there seems to be a catch 22 situation here - the module is currently broken, but the fix cannot be applied without an MMN bump (if it was a fully fledged module). I think to break this catch 22 situation, it seems reasonable to apply the changes to v2.0 without an MMN bump as the code is experimental. Any other thoughts? Regards, Graham --
