[Date Prev][Date Next]
Brett Maxfield wrote:
On 12/03/2013, at 8:04 AM, Howard Chu <email@example.com> wrote:
We're talking about deprecating the BDB-based backends Real Soon Now. I
suppose this should be done in OpenLDAP 2.5, but we've pulled a lot into 2.4
that we had originally slated for 2.5, which keeps pushing any actual 2.5 work
further into the future as we keep extending 2.4.
I imagine dropping bdb completely will leave a multitude of systems which
apart from suffering from distribution lag, will now suffer additionally from
end of line itus, as they will be unable to patch to the newest minor version
if bdb is dropped entirely in some future 2.4.x version..
I'd say deprecate it in 2.4.x great, but dont drop it completely until
If you are in a rush, drop bdb backend from the default configure options to
get the point across, or print a warning or some such notice in configure, so
package maintainers get the hint before 2.6 is released..
Given users have the option to drop bdb today, why force the issue?
Most people don't expect huge changes in behavior, for only minor version
If 2.4.x is stable and feature complete / no new features, then at some
point there will be a natural finish, when there will be few changes for 2.4.x
right? Bug fix only tree for 2.4 would leave resources to work on 2.5 release ?
I only said "deprecating", I didn't say anything about dropping.
back-bdb has already been turned off by default in HEAD. Looks like it's still
on by default in RE24, that seems to be an oversight since we'd been
recommending back-hdb for a long time already.
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
- From: Howard Chu <firstname.lastname@example.org>