Avoiding further (LDAP) stack proliferation in Samba

[Rowland penny]

On 09/06/2020 10:53, Ralph Boehme via samba-technical wrote:
> Am 6/9/20 um 11:15 AM schrieb Andrew Bartlett via samba-technical:
>> I'm sorry, I still hold to my disagreement.
>>
>> It is really important to understand that while this will fix bugs, I
>> don't see this as a bug fix.  This is a lift-and-shift.  These
>> operations are both delicate and risky.  They also often fix bugs and
>> introduce important new features.
>>
>> But this change needs to be evaluated at that, fully aware of the
>> implications, not just passed in as a bug fix.
>>
>> I've been involved in implementing and in particular reviewing a large
>> number of lift-and-shift operations in Samba.  Rarely are they as
>> simple as they appear, and this one has the added complexity in what
>> I've raised about the target.
>>
>> Therefore this cannot be simple regarded as a 'bug fix'.  I'm very
>> sorry.
>>
>> Furthermore I've been told that this is actually the culmination of a
>> significant amount of work over a period of months or even a year.  I'm
>> incredibly sad that this work got to this late stage before public
>> discussions allowed these issues became apparent.
>>
>> That is awful for everyone, and for that I'm sorry.
> I'm sorry, but to me this looks like the better is the enemy of the
> good. Replacing libads with the existing and already used tldap library
> is a step in the right direction.
>
> -slow
>
Hi, can I ask a few questions here ? What, if anything,  will change 
from the users point of view if libads is changed for the tldap library 
? Will a user notice, will everything work as before, will the user 
experience be better or worse ?

Rowland