James Carlson wrote: > > On the grounds that there's a distinct lack of system architecture > here that would allow the project team to make an informed choice (and > allow the ARC to evaluate that choice), and thus this project is > certainly not "obvious," I ask that either the LSARC chair grant me > temporary standing here so that I can derail, or that (alternatively) > an active LSARC member speak up to pull that lever.
Note most of this discussion has been happening in the wrong thread, 2009/123 is the case which switches APR to OpenLDAP. This case, 2009/124 is merely a consequence (what Apache does, PHP must do). I'm derailing 2009/123 myself. If nothing else, the case was filed given the understanding that the contract was ready to go, the change in that status means management has some figuring out to do. > At a minimum, we need to have a written opinion noting that LDAP is a > fundamental system service, and that building it atop a foundation of > sand is a very bad idea. To keep some perspective, what Sun calls volatile sand is what all of these 3rd party applications build their ldap support on and their sky isn't falling from what I'm told. -- Jyri J. Virkki - jyri.virkki at sun.com - Sun Microsystems
