More insingth inline...
Alex Karasulu wrote:
(4) In LdifUtils.reverseModifyDN() the original code seemed to hard
code setting the deleteOldRdn property on the LDIF entry it was
generating rather than using the value from the ModifyDnRequest
argument. Was wondering if this was in fact a
bug? I presumed it might be and while breaking up ModifyDnRequest into
pieces I added the
deleteOldRdn boolean parameter. I use this parameter now instead of
calling entry.setDeleteOldRdn( true ) always.
There was a missing case in my analysis about the ModifyDN operation :
when you don't change the RDN, but simply modify the superior. This was
not handled properly in the code. Hopefully, the code was OK, but
sub-optimal, and didn't reflect the reality.
I have updated the wiki page :
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DIRxSRVx11/Reverse+LDIF
Look at the end of the page, and you will see that I have now 5 cases
instead of 4. The ast one is about the Move operation.
--
--
cordialement, regards,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
directory.apache.org
