On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 07:00:39PM -0600, Michael Lustfield wrote:
> I do agree that this is a good feature to have. I've been sold on the Auth PAM
> module as it seems to be rather stable and also seems to be the most flexible.
> It seems that Cyril also agrees that this is a good feature to have.
>
> However, I do not feel comfortable putting it in anything other than
> nginx-extras. I have included in there. Unless I see some very good and
> compelling reason to include it in -light or -full, it'll stay there only.
I would agree that it is a good idea to put it in -extras first and
give it some testing, but besides testing (and a code audit?) I see
no reason why it should not be included in -light and -full.
While Auth PAM provides a substantial missing functionality to nginx
which is common in other web servers, the various modules in -extras
do not. The Auth PAM module is multiple 100 lines of third-party code,
while the *.c files in debian/modules contribute multiple 1 lines.
Auth Basic and Auth PAM are intended precisely for the simple use
cases, not those where a FastCGI backend or Perl or Lua scripting is
involved.
If the policy were not to include Third Party modules in nginx-light,
than the ngx_http_echo module would not be included in this package.
Given sufficient testing, it would be nice if you could reconsider
your decision with regard to Auth PAM. Of course, the much better
solution would be to provide loadable dynamic modules for all the
non-essential and third-party plugins. Is there a specific reason
why nginx does not provide support for this?
Regards,
Peter
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
