directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alex Karasulu" <akaras...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [shared-ldap] Changes and questions on LdifUtils
Date Sun, 11 Nov 2007 05:11:44 GMT
Why is my email now getting formatted for me :(.  Let me try to put
this email together without adding my own line breaks.

---------------------------------------


Hi Emmanuel,

I started working on the ChangeLog service. As I started to work on it
I began to use the LdifUtils.reverseXXX methods that you were kind
enough to write for me.  I had a few issues and made some changes to
it but I want to make sure these were OK with
you.  I also have a few questions about a couple things ...

First here are a set of my changes to the LdifUtils file and it's test case:

   http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev

Could you look at it while answering some questions for me?

(1) I saw you used AddRequest, DelRequest, ModifyRequest, and
ModifyDnRequest beans to encapsulate the parameters in a single
argument to these methods.  I felt that this would couple the request
objects with the operation so I broke
down this single parameter into several parameters.  This way I did
not have to build these objects just to get the reverse LDIF. Is this
OK?


(2) Do we need to make the Entry take multiple Controls for operations
instead of just one?


(3) Do we need to make the Entry take an LdapDN and not a String?  I'm
thinking this may be more efficient since on the server we'll try to
parse and renormalize the dn when attempting to revert to a snapshot.
WDYT?


(4) In LdifUtils.reverseModifyDN() the original code seemed to hard
code setting the deleteOldRdn property on the LDIF entry it was
generating rather than using the value from the ModifyDnRequest
argument.  Was wondering if this was in fact a
bug? I presumed it might be and while breaking up ModifyDnRequest into
pieces I added the
deleteOldRdn boolean parameter.  I use this parameter now instead of
calling entry.setDeleteOldRdn( true ) always.

Note that after I did this I noticed some test cases started to fail.
I fixed it but I don't know I trust how I did it.  Could you review
these changes to reverseModifyDN for me?  I don't trust myself.

Thanks,
Alex

P.S. I might have the ChangeLog working by tonight - at least to test
reverting which only uses add and delete operations.

Mime
View raw message