directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Radovan Semancik <>
Subject Re: Ldap API 2.0 roadmap
Date Thu, 03 Aug 2017 16:43:06 GMT
On 08/03/2017 02:03 PM, Emmanuel L├ęcharny wrote:
> We have released the Apache LDAP API 1.0 a few weeks ago. This was a
> great acomplishment, after years of efforts. It was not perfect, but
> still, 'good enough' is probably the correct description.

I would say this is more than a correct observation :-)

> ... So let's thing bigger : If we go for a 2.0, I also suggest we move to
> Java 8 only for this version (I mean, Java 8 and higher). ApacheDS will
> also switch to Java 8 and will use this API 2.0 in M25, and teh next
> Studio release should also use the API 2.0 and ApacheDS with API 2.0.

I completely support this proposal.

> I would also suggest we switch to git for the API, now that 1.0 is out.
> SVN is outdated, and it's quite an anchor for us anyway (I have to use
> svn *and* git daily, it makes things more complex...). Nor sure we
> should'nt move to git for all teh projects, but startng wih teh API
> sounds reasonable atm. In any case, I'll write another mail for this change.

Yes, yes, yes! Then sooner the better.

I have few more things to add:

I would like to personally work on the schema error handling and 
reporting. The API currently logs every schema problem as an error - 
even if it can live with the situation. This is really annoying when 
using the API with dirty LDAP servers. The logs are flooded with error 
messages and there is no easy way how to get rid of them. So I would 
like to improve this part of code and make error reporting 

But ... it is likely that any reasonable changes in the code are going 
to break compatibility with API 1.0. Unless we want to maintain very 
ugly and complex compatibility code. Therefore I suggest that we do NOT 
stick to a strict API compatibility between 1.0 and 2.0. This is not a 
problem for me, as I can quickly adapt my client application. But I'm 
aware that it might be a problem for other people. Therefore I would 
like to know opinions of the community regarding API 1.0->2.0 compatibility.

Radovan Semancik
Software Architect

View raw message