[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: liobraries rename

Like I said it makes it easier to link and follows something that's been
established for years. It is primarily a sematics thing. You might argue
if it is distributed, it makes it easier to look for. I think since
everyone has pretty much abandoned their effort and merged their tree into
the openldap one, I don't think that would be much of a problem. After all
openldap aims to be *the* standard free ldap implementation doesn't it? =)

*I* went to Michigan during the time when this stuff was developed. I
think a couple of years later when I asked ggood about this, his response
was something like "no particular reason, we never expected to move this
beyond Michigan anyways". So... now that LDAP has spread much more widely
it makes to do so to follow said convention. I don't particularly see why
you are so opposed to it. Like I said we maintain backward compatility by
doing the symlink thing but we can change all the makefiles et al. It
makes for less hunting around for stuff. If I remember correctly the
version number is hidden somewhere around obscure. And when I wanted to
release a patch last year, I had to hunt around for that file. Things
should be easy to find for developers. I don't particularly poking around
each file till I find what I want esp. since the ldap documentation is so
sparse. It's not a religious issue except I think it would be a good thing
to do. I appreciate having stuff in CVS where more people can work on
stuff but the idea is having a "benovelent dictator" but up till this
point, your conversations with me have been extremely
combative/aggressive. I have no interest in getting into flame wars. I've
been around too long to get back into that. All I want is to move forward
doing something productive. I do not have a lot of time on my hands and I
am involved in a lot of projects but I willing to contribute some part of
my time since I'm doing ldap stuff at work and want to contribute stuff
back to the community at large. Chill and enjoy the nice day (at least it
is here). 


On Sat, 12 Sep 1998, Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote:

> Jauder,
> Renaming directories in an established system should
> not be taken lightly.  The impact of such a change goes
> way beyond what it would take to implement the change.
> My concern is the negative impact to our ability to share
> changes within the LDAP community, in particular with other
> projects using U-Mich derived sources.  Making this change
> would make it much more difficult to share.
> The only argument given for the change is to "follow the
> standard."  Conventions are kind of like statistics.  You
> can always find one to support your arguments.   The LDAP
> convention was set by U-Mich many years ago.
> If you have additional arguments, please present them for
> discussion.
> Kurt