« New LDAP Browser: LDA… | Home | Open Source Conferenc… »

29 June 2007 - 02:03Fedora "Progress"?

Rich Megginson posts an entry over on LiveJournal updating us on what all those CVS commits about admin-server and all really meant. Interesting. Given the performance and functional issues with the Directory's core code, it seems odd this is the best and highest use of time/skills.

Just my 2 kopeks. ... Marty

---

one comment:

Considering that RHDS/FDS is very difficult (almost impossible?) to configure and run without the admin server, and considering that in our tests of the Netscape DS the admin server proved even more fragile than the directory server, Red Hat’s decision to spend time on that aspect of RHDS/FDS is understandable. I agree it doesn’t do much for the code that makes up the DS itself. It remains an old code base with substantial scaling and stability problems.
The orgy of “commercial DS for free” some thought would develop around FDS and spill over into support agreements for RHDS seems not to have materialized yet. Nor, judging by the commits to the source code, has the predicted widespread developer support. Organizations continue to flock to OpenLDAP because of its track record for efficiency, flexibility, and stability.

Matthew Hardin (URL) - 03 07 07 - 04:13 - reply to Matthew Hardin

---

No trackbacks:

---

Name:			Remember personal info? Yes No
Email:
URL:
Comment:		Emoticons / Textile
Comment moderation is enabled on this site. This means that your comment will not be visible on this site until it has been approved by an editor.   ( Register your username / Log in )
Notify:		Yes, send me email when someone replies.
Hide email:		Yes, hide my email address.
Small print: All html tags except <b> and <i> will be removed from your comment. You can make links by just typing the url or mail-address.