Il 01/11/2016 00:55, David Sommerseth ha scritto:
> On 31/10/16 23:25, debbie10t wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 31/10/16 21:30, David Sommerseth wrote:
>>
>>> So let's try to aim at pleasing the end user than being picky about the
>>> wording of a track ticket. Because most users will be thankful for a
>>> related feature than no feature at all.
>>>
>>> Which is also why this core feature was added to the core OpenVPN 2.3
>>> branch. It wasn't important *how* this was solved. It was important
>>> that it was solved in *some* way; for non-Windows having a single line
>>> auth-pass file was the solution. For Windows the solution might need
>>> to be different, just for the similar reasons we don't support bash
>>> scripts on Windows - but we provide support for alternatives.
>>>
>>> Of course the contra argument is that 2.4 have this support. But should
>>> we start recommending users to upgrade to 2.4_alpha in production? I
>>> don't think so - as then we could have jumped straight to the final
>>> release instead. It will be a while until the final 2.4 version is
>>> released.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I believe the *vast* majority of people would prefer to see an Official
>> Release of 2.4 take precedence over 'adding a /convenience/ feature' for
>> a user-base that can/have/will:- not upgrade their operating system.
>>
>> <redacted>
>>
>> Anything else would be a waste of time.
>
> How long will users be willing to wait? I'd be really surprised if 2.4
> is out the door before Christmas 2016. When also considering we've said
> that 2.4_alpha was soon ready for about 1 year or so before it really
> got released, I'd even say I am overly optimistic.
>
> I'm just trying to be realistic.
>
In my opinion Trac 757[*] is not the key here. Instead, we should
definitely have a high-level discussion of our support policy again,
because opinions there seem to differ a bit.
If I recall correctly, our policy for 2.3.x has been to include
- Security fixes
- Long-term compatibility features
- Trivial/safe fixes (e.g. documentation, minor fixes)
Is there something else?
At this point I would concentrate our efforts into getting 2.4.0 out,
instead of (arguably) wasting time backporting useful, but not critical
features to 2.3.x. Your estimate for 2.4.0 release seem reasonable, as
in "doable" and "not too far away for users" imho.
Moreover, if I understood Selva correctly, the problem in Trac 757 can
be solved by the user himself/herself by using OpenVPN-GUI v11 instead
of the one (v10) bundled in OpenVPN 2.3.x installers.
I would also argue that part the complaints is due to confusing
documentation on the man-page:
--auth-user-pass [up]
Authenticate with server using username/password. up is a file
containing username/password on 2 lines. If the password line is
missing, OpenVPN will prompt for one.
Simply noting what is already said in Trac 757 would help reduce the
number of complaints.
My proposal:
a) Improve the man-page
- Tell that OpenVPN-GUI v11 will allow caching of the username
- Explain the limitations of --auth-user-pass
b) Make sure that OpenVPN-GUI v11 can be downloaded/installed separately
--
Samuli Seppänen
Community Manager
OpenVPN Technologies, Inc
irc freenode net: mattock
[*] <https://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/ticket/757>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Openvpn-devel mailing list
Openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-devel
