FC2 and general LDAP Support

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le mer 26/11/2003 à 16:41, =?ISO-8859-1?Q? Nils O. Sel=E5sdal?= a
écrit :
> On Wed, 2003-11-26 at 16:12, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roland K=E4ser?= wrote:
> > Look at the mail from Nicolas Mailhot. This is one of my points.

[...]

> We need to replace all this fragments of configuration 
> > spread nearly over the whole file system by an more professional way of 
> > an configuration concept. 

Please do not read what I didn't put into my mail.

I agree ldap has a place. I agree it's under-used. I agree there is some
info like user descriptions, contacts... that should be moved into
openldap if only because the current setup just does not cut it (the
user system is inadequate for networks/samba, contact handling is a mess
right now...). I also think we won't have a solid ldap setup till it's a
Fedora default, and it's needed for lots of things *now*.

However this won't happen if openldap is too heavy for single-box
systems, and above all this is not an endorsement of "let's do a binary
registry now".)

There is a ton of cleanly defined hierarchical info that could be put
into ldap now and improve user experience. There is also a ton of stuff
that does not belong in there like Windows demonstrates every day.

> We also have gconf, which might be extended to this concept.

gconf might use a ldap backend someday (not sure it's a good idea).
Switching to it now before ldap is solid/manageable would be a terrible
mistake however. Let's do clearly understood stuff first.

Cheers,

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e.
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20031126/9d220ac9/attachment.sig>