On Apr 22, 2010, at 9:58 AM, Michael Str=F6der wrote: > Kurt Zeilenga wrote: >>=20 >> On Apr 22, 2010, at 1:34 AM, [email protected] wrote: >>=20 >>> Kurt Zeilenga wrote: >>>> obsoletes !=3D OBSOLETE, so no. That is, the meaning of the term >>>> 'obsolete' is quite different in these two contexts. >>>>=20 >>>> The latter context the term is defined as follows: The OBSOLETE = field, if >>>> present, indicates the element is not active. >>>=20 >>> I agree that OBSOLETE should not be set in this case. >>>=20 >>>> For user application attribute types, whether the type is active or = not is, >>>> I think, best left to the schema administrator. >>>=20 >>> Who is the schema administrator? >>=20 >> Generally speaking, the OpenLDAP admin administrates which schema = elements >> to load into the schema and whether each such element is active and >> inactive. >=20 > What does "active and inactive" mean exactly? Does that include = changing the > OBSOLETE keyword in schema files? I hope not...
The purpose of the OBSOLETE (inactive) flag is to support transition = away from a particular schema element. Basically, if one no longer = wants to use the attribute type 'x' in their directory, they should 1) = mark x as inactive in the subschema, 2) then remove all uses of x, 3) = then remove x from the subschema. The directory prevents all non-removal updates to inactive elements, = allowing 2 to be well performed. >=20 >> While in some cases a schema admin might design schema elements, I = consider >> schema admin and schema element designer to be two separate roles. >=20 > Agreed. >=20 >>> I'm nitpicking here because on the OpenLDAP >>> lists we all keep telling OpenLDAP admins not to mess with the = standard schema >>> at all. >>=20 >> We often advise admins to load various schema elements into their = schemas. >=20 > The role for loading the shipped schema files is not the question = here. >=20 >> When at I say "don't mess with standard schema elements", what I mean = is >> don't change aspects of schema specifications which are consider per = the >> technical specifications to be immutable on published in a technical >> specification (or otherwise broadly published). >=20 > Does "immutable" include OBSOLETE? I hope so... OBSOLETE is one of the mutable properties of a schema element (because = otherwise it couldn't support local movements away from arbitrary schema = elements). -- Kurt >=20 > Ciao, Michael.
