At 07:22 AM 3/6/2005, Sander Striker wrote:
I assume we are in agreement that the current AAA discussion shouldn't hold up moving to 2.2 either.
Absolutely it does. Either 2.1-dev has made implementing this worse (my essentially workable proposal for 2.0 would no longer work at all, with no workaround) or 2.1-dev has made implementing
such a feature possible, even trivial, even if it's not part of
the httpd-2.2 core. Suggesting we push out 2.2 'as is, whatever'
would be like having shoved out either Ryan's or Greg's original
filter stack without the group coming to concensus (and best of
breed solution.)
I'm not saying we need to have this module. I'm asking if our new auth framework is worse or better than yesterday's for folks to build upon it.
I disagree. The current authentication in 2.1 is far far better than what 2.0 has. I have been using it in production variations for over 2 years now. Just the ability to use any authentication backend with Digest is a huge improvement.
I'm sensing from comments that we've created a more complex structure which is harder to work with, but might not quite solve real world problems. If that's true (I'm +/-0 on deciding until I work this into 2.1-dev auth) then I'm one -1 on 2.2.0.
This whole discussion is about a feature that has never existed before, and there isn't a patch for it yet.
I believe the best method is to attack it at the point of least work, and if it ends up being good, look at extending it to everything.
I think it should be hacked into mod_authnz_ldap, and if it works, then work can be done to generalize it to all the authnz modules. Right now we really don't know what is required to get it done. It is all just mailing list talk and theory.
I do not believe it is appropriate to threaten a -1 veto on 2.2.0 for this issue. Its not a regression, its not something we have a patch for, its something that didn't exist a week ago.
The point to 2.2 is we are doing things that 2.0 couldn't. Either
we have added such things well, or poorly. Only alphas in the
hands of module authors tell us the answer to this. [For that
matter, something somewhere needs to attract our module community
to investigate, I don't think we successfully have engaged them. Not even some high level "what's changed" exists today other than
good old CHANGES.txt.]
Alphas are generally worthless, as they are currently released, imho. We need to get to 'beta' and put it on our front page, get slashdotted, and send out announcement emails.
That said - -nothing- should ever hold up 2.1.x alpha anytime someone has the energy to run with the ball!
I am discouraged from trying to RM one, just from the knowledge that it will get a -1 veto, before I even roll it.
-Paul
