Hi, When I had tried to add new schema elements on on the fly using the new mechanism I had faced a situation when I wanted to add some new entities into a "new schema". I mean I wanted to see a new container under ou=schema. When I added a new objectClass targetting my new schema, the system complained about the absense of ou=objectClasses,cn=<new schema>,ou=schema. So firstly I created a schema container (right jargon?) under ou=schema and then created my entries on the fly targetting that new schema. I thought that having a template schema container for such tasks would be good so taht I could easily copy/paste it with LDAP Studio and fill my new schema entities in. I prepared such a template and it's also attached to this mail. It might be good to have this template out-of-the-box also. WDYT?
Cheer, On 4/20/07, Stefan Zoerner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all! I have started a little text for newbies on how to add custom elements to the schema with the help of the new schema subsystem of ApacheDS. First of all: I works fine to add elements with standard JNDI methods, well done, Alex! My first attempts for the text can be found here: http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DIRxSBOX/Add+your+first+elements+to+the+schema I plan to make this an introduction section to the schema topic in the Advanced User's Guide of ApacheDS 1.5, although there is obviously still some work to do. Any feedback on the current structure and state of the section is therefore highly appreciated! I am a newbie on this schema subsystem as well. The section is build around an example of adding a custom attribute type (numberOfGuns) and a custom object class (ship) to the schema in order to add entries like this one for instance: dn: cn=HMS Victory,ou=ships,o=sevenSeas objectClass: top objectClass: ship cn: HMS Victory numberOfGuns: 104 description: a ship of the line of the Royal Navy, built between 1759 and 1765 For adding numberOfGuns and ship to the schema I have to use OIDs, but I think it is not worth to register them officially below 1.3.6.1.4.1.18060.0. Should I use obvious fun data like 9.9.9.9.9.1 and 9.9.9.9.9.2, describe the idea of OIDs and that a user should normally obtain a unique starting point? Or should I use something which starts with 1.3.6.1.4.1.18060.0 and add it on the list. Perhaps we can add a branch for documentation examples. What do you think? Greetings from Hamburg, Stefan Zoerner (szoerner)
-- Ersin
template.ldif
Description: Binary data
