[17587] in Kerberos_V5_Development
Re: suggestion for locating master kdc logic
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Will Fiveash)
Mon Apr 9 20:14:58 2012
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2012 19:14:48 -0500
From: Will Fiveash <will.fiveash@oracle.com>
To: krbdev@mit.edu
Message-ID: <20120410001448.GF2566@oracle.com>
Mail-Followup-To: krbdev@mit.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <tsl8vi4fwd9.fsf@mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: krbdev-bounces@mit.edu
On Mon, Apr 09, 2012 at 05:06:42PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
> I guess I'd be fine with a realm-level fallback parameter that defaulted
> to the current MIT behavior and that Solaris could patch to on instead
> of off.
Sounds reasonable to me.
> I think you won't be able to completely avoid patches while taking code
> from a project that has a different set of stability guarantees than
> your code base. Nor do I believe that adopting solaris's stability
> guarantees would improve MIT Kerberos.
> I think that balancing things so that you patch a default from off to on
> reduces your patch size over say maintaining the fallback completely in
> Solaris.
Yes, I think that MIT should have a consistent implementation strategy
when changing a default behavior of either providing a compile time
switch or config option that would allow one to choose which behavior
was the default. I know this has been done in some cases but not in all
cases (like this one).
--
Will Fiveash
Oracle Solaris Software Engineer
http://opensolaris.org/os/project/kerberos/
Sent using mutt, a sweet, text based e-mail app <http://www.mutt.org/>
_______________________________________________
krbdev mailing list krbdev@mit.edu
https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/krbdev
