Re: (ITS#6151) Update cosine.schema to RFC 4524

[michael@stroeder.com]

Kurt Zeilenga wrote:
> 
> On Apr 22, 2010, at 1:34 AM, michael@stroeder.com wrote:
> 
>> Kurt Zeilenga wrote:
>>> obsoletes != OBSOLETE, so no.   That is, the meaning of the term
>>> 'obsolete' is quite different in these two contexts.
>>>
>>> The latter context the term is defined as follows: The OBSOLETE field, if
>>> present, indicates the element is not active.
>>
>> I agree that OBSOLETE should not be set in this case.
>>
>>> For user application attribute types, whether the type is active or not is,
>>> I think, best left to the schema administrator.
>>
>> Who is the schema administrator?
> 
> Generally speaking, the OpenLDAP admin administrates which schema elements
> to load into the schema and whether each such element is active and
> inactive.

What does "active and inactive" mean exactly? Does that include changing the
OBSOLETE keyword in schema files? I hope not...

> While in some cases a schema admin might design schema elements, I consider
> schema admin and schema element designer to be two separate roles.

Agreed.

>> I'm nitpicking here because on the OpenLDAP
>> lists we all keep telling OpenLDAP admins not to mess with the standard schema
>> at all.
> 
> We often advise admins to load various schema elements into their schemas.

The role for loading the shipped schema files is not the question here.

> 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).

Does "immutable" include OBSOLETE? I hope so...

Ciao, Michael.