The Suretec Blog - Comments

Gavin Henry: Running a business on desktop Linux

nospam@example.com (Gavin Henry) — Tue, 13 May 2008 09:03:15 +0100

Simply not true:

http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/download

"Ubuntu 8.04 LTS Desktop Edition - Supported to 2011"

"Ubuntu 8.04 LTS Server Edition - Supported to 2013"

"The "LTS" version of Ubuntu receives long-term support. 3 years for desktop versions and 5 years for server versions."

Where did you read 2 years?

Memetic Engineer: Running a business on desktop Linux

nospam@example.com (Memetic Engineer) — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:18:00 +0100

"No forced software and hardware upgrades every couple years"

That is simply not true with Ubuntu !

They produce a new distribution every 6 months and do not support anything older than 2 years old.

Try upgrading an old version of the the distribution i.e. slightly older than 2 years old, to a current one and you are in for a hellish waste of time and resources, involving multiple re-installs, in order to try to bring the software up to the latest security patch level.

Not every company or organisation can afford to write off and replace their desktop computers in less than 2 years.

Gavin Henry: Dedicated OpenLDAP GUI?

nospam@example.com (Gavin Henry) — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 16:27:34 +0100

BTW,

A lot of code has been referenced from http://ldaptool.sf.net (ldapexplorertool-2.0.1) where neccessary. See my latest comment.

Gavin Henry: Dedicated OpenLDAP GUI?

nospam@example.com (Gavin Henry) — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 14:31:21 +0100

Well,

We went ahead and started using wxWidgets, C++ and ldapc++

So that means it works on GNU/Linux, Windows and Mac.

It's still very alpha and is worked on an hour or so a day, if time permits.

Grab the screens for some early shots from last month:

http://www.suretecsystems.com/sosa.zip

We currently hooking controls together etc....slowly. But it's fresh, modelled on the bits we like from all the offerings out there and will do things just for OpenLDAP.

Gavin.

David Cartwright: Dedicated OpenLDAP GUI?

nospam@example.com (David Cartwright) — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 14:01:40 +0100

Wondering if there have been any further developments regarding the proposed OpenLDAP GUI? Such is essential for some of my SMB clients so that they can perform basic administration in the same way as they currently do with AD^[?].

Gavin Henry: Catalyst Book Review Out

nospam@example.com (Gavin Henry) — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 15:11:27 +0000

Hmm, is there anything you can do to contribute to lend advice etc.?

I often find the best way to improve these things is to contribute via patches or posting to the mailing lists.

Thanks,

Gavin.

Everett : Catalyst Book Review Out

nospam@example.com (Everett ) — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 06:04:31 +0000

No, the book has serious flaws in it. Jonathan is a highly intelligent guy, but it's extremely difficult for someone who has worked on Catalyst from the inside out to explain it from the outside in. The whole Catalyst website and web site in general is a prime example of very poor documentation.

Rich Megginson: Fedora Directory Server not good enough for Red Hat?

nospam@example.com (Rich Megginson) — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 15:45:19 +0000

> I still see it as an attacked due to the fact of your comments regarding the OpenLDAP Developers.

Whatever. I think I've clarified any misunderstandings with the only people who matter, and it's obvious you haven't the ability or desire to revise your position, so time to move on.

> and only hope either you personally or as a representative of Red Hat or someone else will participate.

Personally, speaking only for myself, and in no way representing Red Hat, I will be very reluctant to participate in future discussions. My comments seem to be easily misunderstood and twisted against me. If it's because of me, then I need to correct that aspect of my behavior and writing style before I attempt to engage the OpenLDAP community. I've already lost enough time defending myself against what I consider to be baseless accusations. Life is too short, and there's real work to be done.

Gavin Henry: Fedora Directory Server not good enough for Red Hat?

nospam@example.com (Gavin Henry) — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:58:06 +0000

I can only comment on what I have seen and read personally of course. I have seen the negativity you are talking about and made efforts today to see where it stems from:

http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-technical/200802/msg00145.html

I still see it as an attacked due to the fact of your comments regarding the OpenLDAP Developers.

I agree with the rest of your suggestions and comments. I hope we can improve the situation in the ongoing thread at:

http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-technical/200802/msg00145.html

and only hope either you personally or as a representative of Red Hat or someone else will participate.

Gavin.

Anonymous: Fedora Directory Server not good enough for Red Hat?

nospam@example.com () — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 17:11:27 +0000

Do you or any reasonable person deny that there is a lot of negativity directed towards Red Hat and Fedora Directory Server on the OpenLDAP mailing lists, blogs, and IRC channels? Perhaps you feel the negativity is justified, but that's not the point. What I said was a statement of fact. I said ". . . there's so much negativity directed towards Fedora and Red Hat in general . . .". There is much evidence to support my "statement of fact". I still don't see how that could be misconstrued as an attack on OpenLDAP. I object that you are accusing me personally and as a representative of Red Hat.

When I mentioned other vendors, it wasn't to imply that "better than average" is good enough. It's to question why Red Hat is so often singled out as being especially damaging to OpenLDAP. Is it because Red Hat's dominant Linux market position makes it the first exposure many people have to OpenLDAP? And that OpenLDAP has gotten a bad rap because of that? If so, then there is opportunity for Red Hat to do better. And yes, there is a new maintainer. There are many other packages in RHEL that are not kept up to the latest upstream version - OpenLDAP is not alone in this. That's no excuse, just an admission of limited resources to apply to the problem.

Gavin Henry: Fedora Directory Server not good enough for Red Hat?

nospam@example.com (Gavin Henry) — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 12:29:13 +0000

In my personal opinion, it was an attack on the OpenLDAP Project as you were implying there is hate towords Red Hat and Fedora Directory Server from the OpenLDAP Project.

It wasn't an attempt to cast Fedora DS in a bad light, it was a post stating facts which have already been discussed above. And I said "OpenLDAP Guys", which might not include myself.

See more at http://www.connexitor.com/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=195#body

I personally don't currently use RH OpenLDAP packages, so I would not need to file bugs against it. I know others have and have given up. I do understand Fedora has a new OpenLDAP maintainer?

Also, the way RH maintain them for only security fixes and lib dependencies (and some of them don't even have all the overlays built) harms OpenLDAP in general since users don't get the full experience or get caught with bugs that have been fixed already. I do understand how packages work and they can't always be the latest, but certain bug fixes must be pushed out.

It not a matter of being "worse than other vendors", in fact, I can't believe you said that. That's not how standards should be set by asking "are we worse than anyone else?".

The Mandriva OpenLDAP packager is also on the list and has made separate RH RPMs for all the above reasons, reasons in the OpenLDAP list archives and reasons stated at http://www.connexitor.com/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=195#body

I can't comment on RH support as I've never dealt with it, I've only seen the RH OpenLDAP packages.

Rich Megginson: Fedora Directory Server not good enough for Red Hat?

nospam@example.com (Rich Megginson) — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 03:26:39 +0000

Keep in mind that the only reason I replied to your original blog is that you accused me of attacking OpenLDAP, and I'm still waiting for an explanation or an apology, but since you have a mind to supply the rope . . .

> I think our real enemy is the big proprietary companies and in fact, the OpenLDAP guys are cooperating with FDS (and apacheDS etc),

Really? So why go out of your way to make a public blog posting attempting to cast Fedora Directory Server in a bad light? That sure doesn't seem like cooperation to me. And since you yourself are one of "the OpenLDAP guys" how exactly are you cooperating with Fedora Directory Server?

> but that doesn't change the fact that Red Hat is doing us a lot of harm.

Have you filed bugs against the Red Hat OpenLDAP package? Is Red Hat's level of support any worse than other vendors? I'll note that the maintainer for OpenLDAP in SUSE is a major contributor to OpenLDAP, so I'll give you that one.

Red Hat has many customers using the standard OpenLDAP that comes with RHEL, and Red Hat does provide support for them. And yes, many of them are satisfied with the level of support provided by Red Hat.

> Your post was the wrong thing to channel this gripe at.

There's an old saying about a black pot and a kettle . . .

Gavin Henry: Fedora Directory Server not good enough for Red Hat?

nospam@example.com (Gavin Henry) — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 23:29:05 +0000

I think our real enemy is the big proprietary companies and in fact, the OpenLDAP guys are cooperating with FDS (and apacheDS etc), but that doesn't change the fact that Red Hat is doing us a lot of harm.

I guess that's where this post came from, the problem is with Red Hat the company, and its support of OpenLDAP as a bundled product.

I believe in the goodness of Open Source in general, and helping all of the Open Source LDAP^[?] projects advance.

Your post was the wrong thing to channel this gripe at.

Gavin.

Rich Megginson: Fedora Directory Server not good enough for Red Hat?

nospam@example.com (Rich Megginson) — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 20:58:03 +0000

Referring specifically to my original blog posting, you say that ". . . first Red Hat attack OpenLDAP". If that is not deliberately misleading, then you have grossly misinterpreted my posting. Since you threw the first stone, the onus is on you to explain how my posting is an attack on OpenLDAP. "it's left for the reader to interpret it." is an utter and total cop out. You make a false accusation then just leave it up to the interpretation of the reader? So, Gavin, what do you really think?

Gavin Henry: Fedora Directory Server not good enough for Red Hat?

nospam@example.com (Gavin Henry) — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 20:39:16 +0000

OK, I guess this part confused me: we've seen great changes in this application and how its packaged

Agreed though, I think the context has been cleared up.

As for your experiences with OpenLDAP, were they with OpenLDAP built from source or the packages that Red Hat supply? That of course is a whole other post.

Enough already, I think the post has been discussed to death. I only wish more discussion was had on the lists and places where it makes a difference. These little rants do no good.

Thanks for your input though Mike.

Gavin.