directory-api mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emmanuel Lecharny <elecha...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Let's start for real ?
Date Fri, 27 Nov 2009 09:26:43 GMT
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Francois <fanf42@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 27/11/2009 10:05, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
>>
>> Sure, as much as possible. This is why we picked LdapDn instead of DN,
>> and such names. I just have an issue with Attribute, because if we
>> want to write a wrapper around JNDI, it will end with ugly package
>> bnames to be added in the code to avoid confusion between Attribute
>> (jndi) and Attribute (API)...
>
> I don't think we should sacrifice the general public API
> cleanness/homogeneity for the specific JNDI wrapper case.
>
> What we should be looking for is to have the best, cleanest LDAP API - in
> the long term, it is the only one that matters.

You are probably right.

> And for the confusion, well I don't think javax.naming.directory.Attribute
> brings much of it :)

It's just that I don't like to see packages in the code...

But it may be just me :)


-- 
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel L├ęcharny
www.iktek.com

Mime
View raw message