From users-return-2027-apmail-directory-users-archive=directory.apache.org@directory.apache.org Fri Jan 23 10:29:11 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-directory-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 20539 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2009 10:29:11 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 23 Jan 2009 10:29:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 67460 invoked by uid 500); 23 Jan 2009 10:29:11 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-directory-users-archive@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 67440 invoked by uid 500); 23 Jan 2009 10:29:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@directory.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 67429 invoked by uid 99); 23 Jan 2009 10:29:11 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 02:29:11 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of pajbam@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.20 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.217.20] (HELO mail-gx0-f20.google.com) (209.85.217.20) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 10:29:04 +0000 Received: by gxk13 with SMTP id 13so5481702gxk.1 for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 02:28:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=O+qPhuMM9dRyxRVgi4zqtzTDDW7vgmDe+Kl+7rFk4uA=; b=uNrOunwL0xOq+YkzJF6RtnzgrOJVPjwTxpqFuEkAMvgP8Xtrc1Mdo9hSLM6NqRRG3G 1IQOlRZ7j0FlIHfAk4O9pd/l6HQMSKc4t/1jzxRu9pw+e2JgGHt0r8RKUvaelw8gW71z 3CKx6v4whWTgvNZ86n0wG20xSfRqwm36sB3cU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=CFHC73SxlBfTevrXkNg0Z7UnlH4vzeY8ZRmayBksTHpAeVAwae1qggTK3KheZf+Nlf mmK/sPaJpAmOkOdQmlsFf+I6TPKhHkzotsJapYnoRrl1H1Urnmue6EoAh5Ms4CRzB/U1 gO4eerCMF+irPQolJjFyI0xgSBLgTnB4szDa0= MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: pajbam@gmail.com Received: by 10.65.115.6 with SMTP id s6mr1171078qbm.73.1232706523303; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 02:28:43 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <497925E4.1080209@greenfossil.com> References: <4977C47B.5020807@greenfossil.com> <4977C636.4060006@nextury.com> <4977D506.6080502@greenfossil.com> <497831E7.8020003@nextury.com> <20090122105119.mca1esxlw0sg040g@www.seelmann-it.de> <4978453B.9070708@greenfossil.com> <98d8c0860901220517t58e07aedkd7edda01caedc99c@mail.gmail.com> <497925E4.1080209@greenfossil.com> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 11:28:43 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 4a69d77e736a889e Message-ID: <98d8c0860901230228m334cf30fjd41d3e5fec32fcfe@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Apache Studio ldif export From: Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot To: users@directory.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00c09f923ad06f100e046123da73 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --00c09f923ad06f100e046123da73 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Cheong Chung Onn, On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 3:05 AM, Cheong Chung Onn wrote: > Hi Pierre-Arnaud, > > Yes, I created a new partition without any index attributes. I too am > lazy.. :) Then, I'm not the only one. ;) I think it would be better to provide a minimum set of indices when creating a new partition. Same thing for the other fields. Having default values for all fields would help a lot I think. Here's my 2 cents worth about - should Client or Server side do the > ordering. > > 1. If the Studio or Client side would to do the ordering, that would mean > all clients must implement the same piece of logic over and over again. That > may cause future support issues. > > 2. If the Server side do the ordering then what happen if Studio is used > against other Ldap Servers that does not order an exported entries? > > For me now, it does not matter whether Client or Server do the ordering, > because the only tool i now use for Ldap development is Apache DS and > Studio and sometimes OpenLdap to confirm my development works on it too. It's really nice to hear that. Looks like the couple Apache Directory Server and Apache Directory Studio is doing a great job in your development environement. Do not hesitate to give us feedback on how we can improve both. Actually, we fixed the problem by reordering the ldif entries ourselves > manually. I thought it would be cool if Studio Ldif Editor has a feature to > re-order the ldif hierarchy. You could also fix it by providing indices to your partition. It would be better than having to re-order the exported LDIF afterwards. But, your proposal for a re-order command is a good idea. You should propose this as a Jira. Maybe we can find some time to implement it. Best regards, Pierre-Arnaud --00c09f923ad06f100e046123da73--