[mapserver-dev] Tile Access API

[Stephen Woodbridge]

Christopher Schmidt wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 02:02:12PM -0500, Stephen Woodbridge wrote:
>> I have to agree with Daniel on this. This is exactly the issue about 
>> package dependencies that I was griping about on my GDAL packaging 
>> thread. IT sysadmins do not know the technology, they do not care, they 
>> just want to minimize the risk, minimize the changes, etc. They are not 
>> always enlightened and get cranky if something breaks and they have to 
>> get up at 3am to fix it.  They want the packages to be updated and and 
>> not break when they update other system packages for security reasons. 
>> So adding a caching utility to mapserver would not be a bad thing and I 
>> would use it for sure.
> 
> Er, this makes no sense to me.
> 
>  "We want only software which is tested, widely used, widely deployed,
>  and has been thoroughly vetted: so we should create a new software
>  package and use that." 
> 
> MapServer may have 'brand name trust': I accept that. But to claim that
> the creation of a new utility, and shoving it into MapServer's 'home',
> is somehow more secure than using another, existing, tool, is simply
> (imho) foolishness. Now, it's the kind of foolishness that IT
> departments are *great* at, so I'm not claiming that it doesn't happen:
> simply that it doesn't make sense.
> 
> Regards,

No one said IT was smart, look at the blind trust of .NET code. ;)

But seriously, having a small purposed C application is easier to vet, 
if only emotionally, than loading 20+ additional packages and worrying 
about how each of them is configured from a security point of view.

-Steve