Am Mittwoch, 12. Dezember 2012, 09:40:49 schrieb Justin T Pryzby:
> I compared the two ldap modules here:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg01381.html
> (Was it really three years ago??)
>
> Is there any reason to maintain both? What does "full" mean in
> ldapfull?
At a guess, this might be for forward compatibility for configuration files.
ldap and ldapfull are not configured exactly the same way, so if you merge
them (and maybe make ldapfull a synonym for ldap), someone's configuration
will inevitably break, especially if they install the update without
thoroughly reading the changelog.
Two examples off the top of my head:
- ldapfull specifies the LDAP server to use as a free form URI, which it just
passes on unchanged to the underlying API (which is IMHO the way it should be
done), while ldap takes host and port as two separate directives
- ldap supports custom filters, ldapfull does not
Guido
