[Pdns-users] Status of the LDAP backend in 3.0 release

Udo Rader listudo at bestsolution.at
Mon Mar 28 11:54:42 UTC 2011

On 03/25/2011 04:59 PM, Nick Milas wrote:
>> 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.
> I feel I should repeat here Udo Rader's very thoughtful comment that:
> "...(it) might just be that not all people interested in the LDAP
> backend are actively following the mailing list"! In fact, it seems that
> there are quite some people and organizations using it, and moving into
> "unmaintained status" (I'll call it UMS) would be harmful to them.
> However, since little interest has been explicitly exhibited, entering
> UMS might ring a bell to some of the users/organizations to engage more
> actively in its development (but it could push them to entirely drop
> LDAP backend too!). But, of course, there is also Udo's offer to
> possibly "offer some manpower", and, hopefully, LDAP backend might avoid
> entering UMS after all (I hope we will hear some news from him some time
> soon, after "having a look at the issues") by catching up with v3.0. :-)

Well, I promise, I won't vanish into the fog of war :-)

In order to meet with some special requirements, I have already done
some changes to the LDAP backend in the past, so the LDAP backend is not
completely new to me. But as I said, I must first have a look at the
open issues (which should be doable by the end of this week, given my


Udo Rader

Udo Rader, CTO

More information about the Pdns-users mailing list