Re: Extension Refresh (RFC 2589)

2010-03-11 Thread Etienne Bagnoud
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:10:20 + Chris Ridd wrote: > > I think you need a blank line before the new =item line, at least > just for readability. > > I also note the reference to authzid-09 in the diff context is > outdated and should be RFC 4532. > I corrected the patch, I also changed refer

Re: Extension Refresh (RFC 2589)

2010-03-09 Thread Chris Ridd
On 8 Mar 2010, at 09:00, Etienne Bagnoud wrote: > On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 18:11:38 + > Chris Ridd wrote: > >> You should also add an OID to Net::LDAP::Constant so that callers can >> easily test for this extension's presence in the root DSE. >> > > Is that ok ? > > --- Constant.pm 2010-03-08

Re: Extension Refresh (RFC 2589)

2010-03-08 Thread Etienne Bagnoud
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 18:11:38 + Chris Ridd wrote: > You should also add an OID to Net::LDAP::Constant so that callers can > easily test for this extension's presence in the root DSE. > Is that ok ? --- Constant.pm 2010-03-08 09:32:35.465009668 +0100 +++ LDAP/Constant.pm2010-03-08 09:32:

Re: Extension Refresh (RFC 2589)

2010-03-05 Thread Chris Ridd
On 5 Mar 2010, at 15:53, Etienne Bagnoud wrote: > Hi, > > I needed the extended operation "refresh" as Net::LDAP extension. As I > didn't find one, I wrote one. > This is mainly copied from SetPassword.pm, it's my first Perl module I > wrote. > The copyright notice is set that way as I didn't kn

Extension Refresh (RFC 2589)

2010-03-05 Thread Etienne Bagnoud
Hi, I needed the extended operation "refresh" as Net::LDAP extension. As I didn't find one, I wrote one. This is mainly copied from SetPassword.pm, it's my first Perl module I wrote. The copyright notice is set that way as I didn't know what to set precisely, let me know if I'm wrong and it could