<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">I wanted to quickly chime in on this. I agree with the decision to move the LDAP backend into "unmaintained" status and not fix these bugs right now. If there isn't a big enough community demand to supply the resources needed to maintain it, then there likely isn't a big enough demand to make it worthwhile anyway.<div><br></div><div><b>However</b>, I do not think marking the bugs "will not fix" is the right move, as I believe there is a better alternative. Where I work, we have another status called "Deferred." When a bug is determined to be legitimate and needs to be fixed, but for some reason or another can't be fixed right now (e.g., not enough resources, requires major restructure somewhere that needs serious discussion, etc.), we mark it as "Deferred." This indicates later down the road that we had already decided to fix it, but couldn't at that time.</div><div><br></div><div>I think having a status similar to "Deferred" for PDNS bugs and putting these bugs in that status would be a better thing to do. A project this large can have a lot of "Won't Fix" bugs, and a year down the road it could be very hard to sort the "Can't fix" bugs out from the "Won't fix" bugs.</div><div><br></div><div>Thoughts everyone?</div><div><br></div><div>Nick</div><div><br><div><div>On Mar 24, 2011, at 6:06 AM, Nick Milas wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div>Sorry, the following was sent by mistake! Please ignore (the message is already in the list, sent by Udo Rader)!<br><br>Nick<br><br>On 24/3/2011 1:03 μμ, Nick Milas wrote:<br><blockquote type="cite">On 03/24/2011 11:36 AM, Nick Milas wrote:<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">On 24/3/2011 10:11 πμ, Angel Bosch Mora wrote:<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">what about a community donation?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">we could create a ticket with all people interested in this feature<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">and how much can they contribute.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">i think there's more people than we thing using LDAP backend.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">I like the idea. Such an announcement could be published to the ldap<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">communities too.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">However, it strikes me that, although I have repeatedly published about<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">the issue in this list, no one has expressed interest (you are the first<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">one). Yet, I believe that there must be out there at least some<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">people/organizations who use or would be interested in using the LDAP<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">backend. (Googling for powerdns/ldap will reveal at least some activity<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">in the recent or earlier past.)<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">I find it a pity to put the LDAP backend (which I have mentioned in the<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">past that is one of the virtues of powerdns vs other software) to<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">unmaintained status.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">How can this be initiated? Has this be done in the past in the powerdns<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">project?<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Well, this entire thing might just be that no all people interested in<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">the LDAP backend are actively following the mailing list (like myself :-)<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">However, we are using the LDAP backend as well for our couple of<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">PowerDNS servers and would suffer much from dropping LDAP support.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">On the other hand, I perfectly understand Bert's POV on the issue, so I<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">what I can offer is taking a look on the open issues and maybe - if time<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">allows - putting some manpower to it, but I will first have a look at<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">the issues myself.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Regards<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Udo Rader<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">_______________________________________________<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Pdns-users mailing list<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><a href="mailto:Pdns-users@mailman.powerdns.com">Pdns-users@mailman.powerdns.com</a><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/pdns-users">http://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/pdns-users</a><br></blockquote>_______________________________________________<br>Pdns-users mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Pdns-users@mailman.powerdns.com">Pdns-users@mailman.powerdns.com</a><br>http://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/pdns-users<br></div></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>