Graham Leggett wrote: > > Chuck Murcko wrote: > > > Should we be building mod_ldap in here too? My apology for the original > > omission. > > If you can, that would be great. I've been a bit busy over the last few > weeks, so I haven't had a chance to sort out mod_ldap properly. >
Wouldn't it be better if this were named mod_proxy_ldap, for clarity I mean. Or will mod_ldap be capable of standing on its own without mod_proxy? -- Chris -- Guvf vf zl qvtvgnyyl raunaprq rapelcgrq fvtangher.
