I prefer to use Harmony specific properties too, after all it's
Harmony's provider.
Sian January wrote:
> Hi Regis,
>
> I don't know the ldap area that well, but in my experience some of these
> kinds of properties can be quite implementation-specific and therefore
> it's not really necessary or helpful to support them in general. However
agree.
> I'm not sure what makes more sense if we want to have a property that
> essentially does the same thing. I would probably say we should have a
> Harmony one because I think that's what people would expect when they're
Yes, I think we would have Harmony specific ones first, then, if there were
strong reasons we could add supports for ri's.
> running Harmony, but I don't feel that strongly about it.
>
> Regards,
>
> Sian
>
>
> On 11/12/2007, Regis <xu.regis@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> There are some provider-specific environment properties defined in ri's
>> ldap provider, such as,
>> com.sun.jndi.ldap.connect.timeout, com.sun.jndi.ldap.trace.ber
>>
>> I'm not sure how to deal with these properties, should we support them
>> for compatibility reason
>> or we just supply Harmony's provider specific properties, like
>> org.apache.harmony.jndi.ldap.timeout?
>>
>> Any thoughts or suggestions?
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Regis.
>>
>
>
>
|