Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8CC5217580 for ; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 14:20:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 23347 invoked by uid 500); 27 Jun 2015 14:20:12 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 23288 invoked by uid 500); 27 Jun 2015 14:20:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 23278 invoked by uid 99); 27 Jun 2015 14:20:12 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd4-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 14:20:12 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd4-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd4-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 8CE41C006D for ; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 14:20:11 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd4-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.121 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.121 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd4-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-eu-west.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd4-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.11]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jzoqxBomWOFX for ; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 14:20:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pa0-f41.google.com (mail-pa0-f41.google.com [209.85.220.41]) by mx1-eu-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-eu-west.apache.org) with ESMTPS id C2D9520924 for ; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 14:20:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: by padev16 with SMTP id ev16so82715915pad.0 for ; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 07:20:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=w2yzVtJAfizlCTed08TJDDww6lIK7Nf1Rf/SycsmzDM=; b=jXWY+l/eR8vlLo9t5195HDCbDGNe+UkEFyCzEpoRxef5F2XYUArO3YoJSdPkDKNvFP pXWTWfG2YjKLAxxPayhHNqBUPEF/0p3LjrpF3UJvP8PU1j9E1K9F21WLUndNl41zioO5 4T7jW4JZFnaqpNVxw1svkw5sMraOrSa7CnXxWRDiQLd3V6rdbcJ7WXaO+ii1Rf82l9cy NOPSbULr1aNRvXY3ox7yIl4oaEJwQ/sDeZgAqFD+6Wa7LPairUZyFMMp0Tkdm2UuQyqb R4D9wnR2JJvXrJxshmsIcOE3s+rL+yzj8zO6K7VAvFUtZX86DQ+pISBUFOJ0oSZAtVMk EPJg== X-Received: by 10.70.15.1 with SMTP id t1mr13640742pdc.155.1435414802482; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 07:20:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.29] ([90.24.197.153]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id dd3sm36986502pad.45.2015.06.27.07.20.00 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 27 Jun 2015 07:20:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <558EB10D.70907@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 16:19:57 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?RW1tYW51ZWwgTMOpY2hhcm55?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Apache Directory Developers List Subject: Re: [Studio] Openldap configuration editor status References: <558EAC51.2020909@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <558EAC51.2020909@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Le 27/06/15 15:59, Emmanuel Lécharny a écrit : > o Otherwise, there are 37 AttributeTypes tat are shared across many > configuration ObjectClasses. I will have to create dedicated widgets for > those guys, in order to avoid code duplication. This is not really > complicated, just an externalisation of some existing code. My bad... I was using the LdapSchema browser, where the Attributes are exposed for every ObjectClasses that are using them *or* that are inherited from. The inheritance causes many of those attributes to be duplicated, when it's not the case... That make me think the Ldap Schema Browser should expose the inherited attributes in a different way (different color, or with a tag before them...)