From: "Doug MacEachern" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 4:29 PM > > hi, why are there ldap modules in the httpd-2.0 tree? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ryan Bloom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Graham Leggett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Justin Erenkrantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 5:59 PM Subject: Re: [PATCH] LDAP extension to apr-util (take 2) > > Now this I can get behind. > > On Monday 13 August 2001 13:37, Graham Leggett wrote: > > Ryan Bloom wrote: > > > Then this is the only thing that should be in apr_ldap. If we are trying > > > to create a wrapper library to abstract out differences in all of the > > > other LDAP libraries, then I _might_ be able to get behind that. > > > > Ok. > > > > > None of that stuff belongs in apr-util. This has nothing to do with > > > portability, this has to do with attaching LDAP to a web server. If this > > > is something that we want to provide as a standard part of Apache, not > > > sure we do (haven't thought about it much), then it should be a part of > > > the module that attaches the two together, not a part of the abstraction > > > library. > > > > So this should be part of Apache - now for the next question - should it > > be an Apache module, or part of the Apache core? > > > > > If these routines are not meant to be an abstraction layer for all LDAP > > > libraries, then they do not belong in APR or APR-util. > > > > Ok, I propose this: > > > > - The linking-to-miriad-of-different-ldap-libraries function, and the > > small bit in apr_ldap_compat.c that smooths out differences between > > functions in LDAP v2 and v3 should go in APR-util (or APR?). (This patch > > is small and easy to review.) > > +1 > > > > > - The LDAP connection-reuse / compare cache should be abstracted into > > their own module in the Apache tree (under modules/ldap/) that provides > > additional LDAP services to modules that need them. > > +1 > > Ryan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Justin Erenkrantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Graham Leggett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 5:46 PM Subject: Re: [PATCH] LDAP extension to apr-util (take 2) > On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 10:37:33PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote: > > - The linking-to-miriad-of-different-ldap-libraries function, and the > > small bit in apr_ldap_compat.c that smooths out differences between > > functions in LDAP v2 and v3 should go in APR-util (or APR?). (This patch > > is small and easy to review.) > > ++1. > > > - The LDAP connection-reuse / compare cache should be abstracted into > > their own module in the Apache tree (under modules/ldap/) that provides > > additional LDAP services to modules that need them. > > +1. -- justin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Roy T. Fielding" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Graham Leggett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Justin Erenkrantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 5:43 PM Subject: Re: [PATCH] LDAP extension to apr-util (take 2) > > Ok, I propose this: > > > > - The linking-to-miriad-of-different-ldap-libraries function, and the > > small bit in apr_ldap_compat.c that smooths out differences between > > functions in LDAP v2 and v3 should go in APR-util (or APR?). (This patch > > is small and easy to review.) > > +1 > > > - The LDAP connection-reuse / compare cache should be abstracted into > > their own module in the Apache tree (under modules/ldap/) that provides > > additional LDAP services to modules that need them. > > +1 > > ....Roy
