On 06/26/2014 10:44 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 26.6.2014 10:39, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/26/2014 10:33 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 26.6.2014 09:40, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/26/2014 09:33 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 26.6.2014 09:21, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/26/2014 08:30 AM, Jan Cholasta
On 07/01/2014 12:19 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 06/26/2014 10:44 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 26.6.2014 10:39, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/26/2014 10:33 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 26.6.2014 09:40, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/26/2014 09:33 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 26.6.2014 09:21, Petr Viktorin
Tomas Babej wrote:
On 07/01/2014 12:19 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 06/26/2014 10:44 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 26.6.2014 10:39, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/26/2014 10:33 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 26.6.2014 09:40, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/26/2014 09:33 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 26.6.2014
On 07/01/2014 02:41 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Tomas Babej wrote:
On 07/01/2014 12:19 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 06/26/2014 10:44 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 26.6.2014 10:39, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/26/2014 10:33 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 26.6.2014 09:40, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On
On 25.6.2014 18:25, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/25/2014 05:29 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
Hi,
On 25.6.2014 17:17, Tomas Babej wrote:
Hi,
Our datetime conversion does not support full LDAP Generalized
time syntax. In the unsupported cases, we should fall back
to string representation of the
On 06/26/2014 08:30 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 25.6.2014 18:25, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/25/2014 05:29 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
Hi,
On 25.6.2014 17:17, Tomas Babej wrote:
Hi,
Our datetime conversion does not support full LDAP Generalized
time syntax. In the unsupported cases, we should
On 26.6.2014 09:21, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/26/2014 08:30 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 25.6.2014 18:25, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/25/2014 05:29 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
Hi,
On 25.6.2014 17:17, Tomas Babej wrote:
Hi,
Our datetime conversion does not support full LDAP Generalized
time
On 06/26/2014 09:33 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 26.6.2014 09:21, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/26/2014 08:30 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 25.6.2014 18:25, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/25/2014 05:29 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
Hi,
On 25.6.2014 17:17, Tomas Babej wrote:
Hi,
Our datetime conversion does
On 26.6.2014 09:40, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/26/2014 09:33 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 26.6.2014 09:21, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/26/2014 08:30 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 25.6.2014 18:25, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/25/2014 05:29 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
Hi,
On 25.6.2014 17:17, Tomas Babej
On 06/26/2014 10:33 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 26.6.2014 09:40, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/26/2014 09:33 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 26.6.2014 09:21, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/26/2014 08:30 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 25.6.2014 18:25, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/25/2014 05:29 PM, Jan Cholasta
On 26.6.2014 10:39, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/26/2014 10:33 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 26.6.2014 09:40, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/26/2014 09:33 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 26.6.2014 09:21, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/26/2014 08:30 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 25.6.2014 18:25, Petr Viktorin
Hi,
On 25.6.2014 17:17, Tomas Babej wrote:
Hi,
Our datetime conversion does not support full LDAP Generalized
time syntax. In the unsupported cases, we should fall back
to string representation of the attribute.
In particular, '0' is used to denote no value of LDAP generalized
time attribute.
On 06/25/2014 05:29 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
Hi,
On 25.6.2014 17:17, Tomas Babej wrote:
Hi,
Our datetime conversion does not support full LDAP Generalized
time syntax. In the unsupported cases, we should fall back
to string representation of the attribute.
In particular, '0' is used to denote
13 matches
Mail list logo