On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny <[email protected]> wrote: > On 10/12/10 8:36 AM, Pierre-Arnaud MARCELOT wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I agree that it could be interesting to have this kind of feature. >> >> Wouldn't it be more interesting to have the ability to give a list of >> specific ATs that should be hidden instead. >> We have that in Studio and it gives much more power and flexibility. > > That's a pretty good idea. > > However, I think that this kind of protection can be better handled by the > ACI subsystem. Atm, as it's a bit broken, I'd like to keep this parameter > along until we have a better way to manage ATs. > > That also means the move was not stupid, it's just that it's temporarily > useful, and probably easier to manage than a global ACI. before actually removing it I have checked for the references to the isPasswordHidden() method present in the DirectoryService but sadly I missed that the SearchHandler uses it, so it should be reverted (I ran the integ tests but without building protocol-ldap so didn't find this issue) cause the build is broken now, I should have checked by doing a full build, sorry for the trouble if anyone had with a broken trunk.
OTOH, I think enforcing this feature with ACI seems to be the better way > > -- > Regards, > Cordialement, > Emmanuel Lécharny > www.iktek.com > > Kiran Ayyagari
