Re: Ticket #1332930 (Feature Requests)

[Kirktis]

I did hesitate to send this, for the sole reason that it proposes additional requirements; but isn't LDAP designed to do exactly what is wanted here? In fact, I was under the (perhaps incorrect) impression that someone was already making progress on an LDAP address book feature. This also has the additional benefit that it can be made compliant with using LDAP address books on userland software (ie: Outlook, Thunderbird, etc.).

Unless I miss something, that would provide exactly those features that are being requested.

On 8/10/06, Thomas Bruederli < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Eric Stadtherr wrote:
> Should rev306 be backed out then? It goes against this concept.
>
Well, my explanations haven't been clear enough when I talked to
Tobias... I'll take care of that, but it definitely goes against my ideas.

I don't see any reason to have lots of fields in the database if we
choose a format that can be parsed fast and allows us interchange the
data with other formats for import/export/sync. If searching the
contacts gets a problem I suggest to create a fulltext index with all
field values required for search.

Please don't hesitate to post your opinions to the addressbook/database
design.

Regards,
Thomas