directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Boorshtein <>
Subject Re: Interest in JXPlorer as a subproject of Directory
Date Tue, 26 Apr 2005 13:33:52 GMT

>    Q3: SQL-LDAP-JLDAP-SWT-SWING-Hybridization?
>    ans: The SQL directory browser looks cool!  JX is
> architected to 
> allow for different 'data brokers' (==providers) to
> connect to 
> different data sources; so there is a broker for
> and another for LDIF at the moment.  The
> architecture should allow for 
> a 'SQL bridge' provider to be added pretty easily,
> and this would be 
> very, very neat.  (There's a reasonable summary
> diagram of the 
> architecture at: 

i hadn't taken a long look at jxpleror yet, but it has
quite an impresive architecture.  While I think it
would be great to have an "SQL-LDAP" backend or
whatnot, it's not really the point of the SQL
Directory Browser.  The browser had 3 primary goals:

1.  I've never liked ldap browsers in general.  I'm
not a fan of large and complex filters and I prefer
typing to "point and click", while at the same time
liking the visualization you get from graphical
browsers.  As I had already written the jdbc-ldap
bridge I thought it would be nice to use SQL to browse
LDAP directories.  I also liked the idea of
firefox/mozilla using tabs to seperate sessions, and
when working with multiple directories (which was
pretty common for me) it was impossible maintaining
about 50 command lines/browser windows :-)

2.  I wanted to learn how SWT worked outside of

3.  I wanted a test bed for new technologies (it's
since grown to include better dsmlv2 support, spml and
basic RDBMS browsing).

So i'd love to work with you to include the SQL
technologoy, but i don't think it would really be
usefull as a "broker" technology (inless of coarse i
am missing something and that it's actually quite easy
to add to the jxplorer front end).

>  Sometimes it's 
> easier to write a jndi provider and use the JNDI
> broker (e.g. for 
> DSML), sometimes it's easier to write a stand alone
> broker (e.g. for 
> LDIF files).
>      Re Swing/SWT - I'm not very thrilled with
> Swing, and if I had my 
> time again I'd probably write it in SWT, but I don't
> know too much 
> about it :-).

Would this possibly be a good oppourtunity? :-)


View raw message