Who is using python-ldap with Python 1.5.x and 2.0-2.2?

[Michael Ströder]

Matej Vela wrote:
> Michael Ströder <michael at stroeder.com> writes:
> 
>> And how about OpenLDAP libs and gnutls? Yes, I'm nagging here, but 
>> because of very good reasons.
> 
> I don't see it as nagging at all, you're perfectly right not to support
> modifications you're not comfortable with.  I hope we provide a
> reasonable level of support ourselves, both on this list and through
> bugs.debian.org.

Matej, sure I appreciate your contributions to python-ldap's code. Your 
patches in the past helped a lot.

> To provide some context, OpenLDAP 2.1 client libraries were not quite as
> ancient at the time the current Debian release was frozen in late 2006.

Late 2006 the OpenLDAP 2.3.x branch really matured. Since the OpenLDAP 
developers never maintain more than two branches at the same time they 
surely had set at least the status of OpenLDAP 2.1 to historic. Which 
means: Don't use it. I believe work on OpenLDAP 2.4.x code branch might 
have already started so 2.2.x was maybe already historic at that time 
either.

The files' timestamp here seem plausible to me (I even remember Kurt 
releasing OpenLDAP 1.0 back in '98):
ftp://ftp.openldap.org/pub/openldap/openldap-release

> A newer version didn't make it in time due to problems with symbol
> versioning -- because of the large number of libraries and plugins
> linked with libldap, a binary could end up simultaneously using code
> compiled with different LDAP ABIs, and promptly crash.

Well, the even API of python-ldap is different when linked to such old 
OpenLDAP libs. My aim is to really stream-line that.

> The next Debian
> release (due out later this year) will use libldap 2.4 with versioned
> symbols.

I appreciate it. Maybe it would be worth to talk more with upstream 
developers which version of their code to use in a freezed distribution 
release.

Ciao, Michael.