Re: A changeLogEntry and LDIF question ..

[sanjay jain <sanjay.jain@software.com>]

Gordon Good wrote:

> It's rather arbitrary, though. One can imagine a
> different definition of
> the changelog entry object class with only two attributes: a
> changenumber and a changes attribute which completely describes the
> changes to be made, in LDIF format. The drawback of a minimalist
> approach like that is that you cannot search the changelog based on
> attributes of the change, e.g. the DN of the entry being modified.
> That's why "targetdn" and "changetype" are attributes of the changelog
> entry, even though they could be represented in the LDIF that describes
> the changes.
'targetDn' and 'changeType' in changelog entry look OK.
I thought its little bit odd that changes for add and modify
operations are in 'changes' and changes for modrdn are
explicit attributes of 'changelogentry'.  Perhaps a nit..

sanjay