At 10:55 AM 8/20/2005, Pierangelo Masarati wrote: >Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote: > >>It seems many of the overlays in slapd/overlays should be >>moved into contrib/slapd-modules (or contrib/slapd-overlays).... >> > >In principle I agree. However there's an issue: sometimes people (read: >customers) prefer to have monolithic software. A nice feature of overlays >(and backends and many other components) is that they do build as dynamic >modules as well, so they can be entirely factored out of slapd, but then we >lose the possibility to have things monolithic (from a system administration >and packaging stand point; they're still modules from a developer's >viewpoint). I'd prefer to keep the possibility to statically build most of >the overlays, as soon as they're of some general usefulness. Unfortunately I >tend to judge generality biased by my personal experience, e.g. by what >customers ask us...
I wouldn't have a problem supporting statically including contributed modules, I just rather have the contributed modules located in contrib. Of course, moving them would require some build environment work to continue to allow both dyanmic and static linking. Kurt
