Hi Dan,
This is wonderful! I, for one, would greatly appreciate it.
Thanks!
Gordana
Dan Wells d...@calvin.edu 7/26/2011 6:34 PM
Hello Gordana,
We are currently using LDAP to authenticate. I may be mistaken, but I believe
the code attached to the following message is still our current
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Lori Bowen Ayre lori.a...@galecia.com wrote:
Yes, thanks for the clarification Dan. So, based on what you've said, I'm
updating the Evergreen feature summary some of us are working on to LDAP
supported. I've added it as feature SA537 (System Admin 537) in
Thank you! Will update SA537 to Not Supported!
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 8:41 AM, Dan Scott d...@coffeecode.net wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Lori Bowen Ayre lori.a...@galecia.com
wrote:
Yes, thanks for the clarification Dan. So, based on what you've said,
I'm
updating the
As a middle ground I'd say it's Under Development and once accepted
into the core (or should it be when available in a release version) we
set it to Supported.
Cheers
On 07/27/2011 10:41 AM, Dan Scott wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Lori Bowen Ayrelori.a...@galecia.com wrote:
Yes,
Maybe we need to create new category called Patch Available or something
like that?
Lori
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 8:51 AM, Anoop Atre anoop.a...@mnsu.edu wrote:
As a middle ground I'd say it's Under Development and once accepted into
the core (or should it be when available in a release
Hello Lori,
There may be other cases where Patch Available would make sense, but at
least for this case, I think Under Development is our best bet (if such a
category already exists). The patch which is available is quite old, and is
really more of a starting point than something which can
Hi,
On 07/27/2011 12:27 PM, Dan Wells wrote:
There may be other cases where Patch Available would make sense, but at
least for this case, I think Under Development is our best bet (if such a
category already exists). The patch which is available is quite old, and is
really more of a starting
I would definitely support a pluggable authentication system, since
different communities may use different authentication systems.
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 13:59, Galen Charlton g...@esilibrary.com wrote:
Hi,
On 07/27/2011 12:27 PM, Dan Wells wrote:
There may be other cases where Patch
I support this idea as well. How could we move the idea forward enough
that I could shop the project around for other developers to help us with
it?
Lori
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 11:57 AM, David Fiander da...@fiander.info wrote:
I would definitely support a pluggable authentication system,
Hello Lori,
I have moved the technical aspects of this discussion over to the Dev list. I
fully expect we will be able to make this happen for 2.2. If you are not on
the Dev list, you can follow the discussion here:
Hi there,
Does anyone use LDAP to authenticate Evergreen users?
Thanks!
Gordana
Gordana Vitez
Library Services Systems Coordinator
NC Libraries and Learning Commons
Niagara College
300 Woodlawn Rd
Welland Ontario
L3C 7L3
Phone: (905) 735 2211 ext 7404
Fax: (905) 736 6021
Gordana,
If you go to the main Evergreen site (http://evergreen-ils.org) and use the
Search Box in the right hand corner, you can search for LDAP and get a few
hits from 2009.
Lori
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lori Bowen Ayre // Library Technology Consultant
The
Hi there,
Lori, thanks for the search suggestion. I should have mentioned in my email
that I did do the search but didn't find mention of anyone actually using it.
Jason, thanks for letting me know it's a no right now.
Is this something other libraries might benefit from? Would this be
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Gordana Vitez gvi...@niagaracollege.ca wrote:
Hi there,
Lori, thanks for the search suggestion. I should have mentioned in my email
that I did do the search but didn't find mention of anyone actually using
it.
Jason, thanks for letting me know it's a no
Hello Gordana,
We are currently using LDAP to authenticate. I may be mistaken, but I believe
the code attached to the following message is still our current version, with
the one exception of an |= which is supposed to be an ||=.
15 matches
Mail list logo
