On Thu, 2002-10-03 at 08:06, Andrew Bartlett wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Let just remove the multi-domain stuff for now and try > > and get 3.0 in a shippable state. > > The 'new SAM' stuff is not being proposed for 3.0! Certainly not yet, > we have a *lot* of work to do, before it gets there! > > Also, *please* don't confuse that with the multi-backend stuff. That > has a very different purpose, and was not included in the new SAM design > for exactly the reasons people don't want it in passdb. > > The use of multiple backends in passdb has acknowledged issues, and I'm > not particularly fussed if you feel it should not ship with this > functionality enabled. However, please do note that this *is* being > used at present, and cannot be 'just removed'. (We map our non-passdb > users into the system via this method). Volker has some solutions to > this issue however, which look very neat. I'll need to check if they > actually catch it all the cases. >
So let me understand: you say sam will not be in 3.0 you see currently passdb has been made so that nobody like it and is not good but you also say we should not end up using a correct solution because you want to maintain the status quo? We have to fix passdb or sam, just let decide on which one we should work on or go for a third way. Simo. -- Simo Sorce - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Xsec s.r.l. via Durando 10 Ed. G - 20158 - Milano tel. +39 02 2399 7130 - fax: +39 02 700 442 399
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
