Ronny Aasen wrote: > Kurt Gramlich wrote: >> * Steffen Jöris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070403 13:23]: > CipUx might be what many users need. but it's not what all users need. > So i hope lwat will be able to easily adapt to cipux's ldap tree, since > for many schools lwat will be sufficient.
I doubt I will do much to adopt the security model of cipux into lwat. > personally i'd prefer that we did not mess up a lot of ldap databases by > upgrading to cipux'ldap as default. But rather replaced wlus with lwat > for the upgrades, but provide cipux as apt-get able packages that users > can migrate to if wanted. > of course exsisting users that allready have cipux (french and german) > would be upgraded to cipux since that package is installed on their system. > > now on a freshly installed system we must either > - install skole ldap with lwat as admintool (cipux apt-get able) > - install cipux ldap with cipux and lwat as admintool. (i am assuming > lwat can support cipux's ldap) It can be made possible yes, but as I dont need this on a installation I maintain, I doubt that I will find the funding to make that happen. But the source code is freely availible (lwat is GPL), so people might do whatever they like with it. > i say cipux AND lwat since different users have different needs. and I > dislike locking users into a system, having 2 options is a benefit. Me too, but if you choose the model of cipux, I fear that you're locked into the use of cipux. -- Finn-Arne Johansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bzz.no/ EE2A71C6403A3D191FCDC043006F1215062E6642 062E6642 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
