upgrade path for distributions

Alan DeKok aland at deployingradius.com
Sun Sep 2 19:45:48 CEST 2007

Stephen Gran wrote:
> We already do, and that's part of the problem here, unfortunately.
> Trust me, I'm not loving the new package name idea and all that goes
> with it.

  Well, we're moving to calling the tarballs 'freeradius-server",
because the project is becoming bigger than just a RADIUS server.

>>  And why not call the binary "radiusd"?  I know it conflicts with
>> Debian's xtradius, etc.  But geez, does anyone *really* use that stuff
>> any more?
> Heh, probably not, but since we ship a bunch of radiusd's, I think it
> would be impolite to take the name unilaterally.

  Yeah, but speaking as a (cough) completely unbiased observer, those
other RADIUS servers *suck*.  And I'm not talking about features.  Who
in their right mind would deploy a critical server which hasn't had a
release or a post to it's mailing list in 3 years?

>  That's why apache is
> shipped as apache/apache2 rather than httpd, for instance.

  Yeah, it doesn't mean I like it.

  And realistically speaking, 1.1.x isn't strictly backwards compatible,
either.  People have *had* to upgrade at some point.

  Once 2.0 is released, I *very* much doubt we'll continue with
development on the 1.1.x branch.  The new features are so powerful that
it's just too painful to use 1.1.x any more.

  Alan DeKok.

More information about the Freeradius-Devel mailing list