logo_kerberos.gif

Difference between revisions of "Grandfathered 1.7 projects"

From K5Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Remove Windows CCAPI as a grandfathered project -- it is now a first class project.)
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 8: Line 8:
 
* CCAPI locking
 
* CCAPI locking
 
** ccache cursor work to support KIM
 
** ccache cursor work to support KIM
* CCAPI implementation for Windows; this project has not yet been approved but a proposal for approval has been sent to kfwdev. This process should not be restarted.
 
 
* KFW 3.3 support for 64-bit windows
 
* KFW 3.3 support for 64-bit windows
   

Latest revision as of 14:47, 8 January 2008

This project has been approved and is being actively worked on. Comments should be addressed to krbdev@mit.edu.


Several projects were under way before the Project policy was proposed. This documents projects that are ongoing in the 1.7 release process and that are not expected to fully follow that approval process. If any of these projects last beyond the 1.7 process, then project pages should be created for those projects. Those projects need not go through a formal approval process.

  • The Kerberos Identity Management API
  • Network Identity Manager 2.0. The basic approach has been approved, but additional detail was requested regarding how NIM 2.0 will interact with core Kerberos. That design gate is outstanding; a project page should be created with that information and that aspect (but only that aspect) reviewed through the project policy.
  • CCAPI locking
    • ccache cursor work to support KIM
  • KFW 3.3 support for 64-bit windows


Approved in concept

Some projects have been approved in concept but there are still outstanding details.

We have agreed that we want a plugin based mechanism glue layer. We have not yet agreed to the details. This project should go through a project review particularly focused on the proposal for pointer registration. However the basic question of whether we want to do the work or whether solving the problem is a good idea is not open for discussion.


We have agreed that a CCAPI implementation for Unix would be a good idea. It became clear discussing specific details that the specifics need to go through a project review.

We have agreed that KFW 4.0 will drop krb4 support. We have not agreed to all the details.