directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Karasulu <akaras...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Control package changes
Date Fri, 04 Feb 2011 04:34:55 GMT
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 1:18 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny <elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/4/11 12:14 AM, Stefan Seelmann wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 4:37 PM, Alex Karasulu<akarasulu@apache.org>
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Create new packages for extra controls, the 2nd class of optional
>>> controls of which we have the following for replication and ppolicy:
>>>
>>> PasswordPolicy
>>> SyncDoneValue
>>> SyncInfoValue
>>> SyncModifyDn
>>> SyncRequestValue
>>> SyncStateValue
>>
>> I just wonder why those controls are named "...Value"? Sorry if this
>> was already discussed and I missed it.
>
> It hasn't been discussed, it's the name those controls have in RFC 4533 :
>
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4533.txt, par 2.2, 2.3, etc
>
>>> Bases:
>>> [PRIVATE PACKAGES]
>>> org.apache.directory.shared.ldap.extras.controls.impl
>>> org.apache.directory.shared.ldap.extras.extended.impl
>>>
>>> Subpackages:
>>> [PRIVATE PACKAGES]
>>> org.apache.directory.shared.ldap.extras.controls.impl.ppolicy
>>> org.apache.directory.shared.ldap.extras.controls.impl.syncInfoValue
>>> org.apache.directory.shared.ldap.extras.controls.impl.syncDoneValue
>>> org.apache.directory.shared.ldap.extras.controls.impl.syncRequestValue
>>> org.apache.directory.shared.ldap.extras.controls.impl.syncStateValue
>>> org.apache.directory.shared.ldap.extras.controls.impl.syncModifyDn
>>
>> Do we really need different packages for all the SyncRepl controls?
>
> Nope. Alex just merged them all in a extra.controls package.

Cool Em got to it before me.

>> When reading RFC 4533 the syncInfoValue is not a control, but the
>> value of an immediate response message. Should it be put to the
>> 'contols' package then?
>
> Very good remark. I have no valid answer right now...

They were implemented as controls when I first looked at them. I have
not bothered looking at the RFC. Not sure I care that much about it
either now that I know it's not transaction aware.

Regards,
Alex

Mime
View raw message