On 10/19/2015 02:23 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote:
I think we can wait for another release, that may come quite quickly (I have myself some additional fixes for the LdifAnonymizer).
OK. No problem. Just let me know when the M32 release is done so I can commit my code.
Regarding the missing controls/extOps, here is what I would suggest : we could spend some time implementing a batch of the missing AD elements, and cut a release as soon as it's done.
Hmm, but there is a problem. It does not make much sense to implement the controls "theoretically". They have to be tested with real AD instances. We all know how AD "works", eh?
So I would counter-propose to implement the controls gradually when someone needs them and someone is able to test them. This is the case for the "Deleted" control: I need it and I have a setup to test it with real AD instance. Yes, this specific control is trivial. But there are quite complex controls in the AD set ...
For controls, it's not necessarily complex, it's just a bit time consuming (especially the tests).
Well, yes, unit tests are a bit time consuming. But tests with real AD are insanely time consuming as AD will not tell you what is the problem. So, unless you already have a setup where you can test it easily I see no point in implementing something that will not be tested.
The only part I'm not sure of is which ones should we include and which ones should we ignore. I suspect we should go to the full extent and make the API as complete as possible...
For me it is the "Deleted" control now. Maybe SD_FLAGS a bit later. -- Radovan Semancik Software Architect evolveum.com
