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

Re: ldapsearch in OL 2

On Fri, 3 Aug 2001, Pierangelo Masarati wrote:

> > but there is significant code deployed
> > on site which assumes a 6-digit, YYYYmm format string.  Modifying all that
> > is likely to be an irritating venture,
> You may delegate the comparison/breeding in a function that takes
> care of normalizing the date back and forth according to your needs;
> then code changes would be very localized.

The coding procedures which produced the code which relies on the YYYYmm
format for memberUntil is reminiscent of the Y2K problem.  Nobody learnt,
but I'm the current maintainer of the mess, so it's My Problem, although
it's not My Code.

> > That sounds like a reasonable vote of confidence.
> I mean: it should really be a matter of days. And you may consider
> using REL_ENG_2 in the meanwhile: the fact it is tagged REL_*
> means it's something WAY better than an unreliable HEAD snapshot.

I take anything that comes out of CVS as likely requiring babysitting, bug
reporting, and other such fun.  If it's a real tarball release, I figure
that people believe it to be at least reasonably stable and ready for use.

#include <disclaimer.h>
Matthew Palmer