compilation error

[Joe Little]

BTW -- can anyone post to the list the most recent patches (Konstanin's)

I'll grab them soon. I'll be connected to the net every other day for a
bit, and the connection is so slow.. no web surfeing for me.

As to the message, you have valid points. From my standpoint, the problems
require further research, so any reply would be less than adequate at this
stage..


On Thu, 24 May 2001, Michael Ströder wrote:

> Joe Little wrote:
> >
> > you'll notice that 1.2.x will slowly be unsupported/unavailable.
>
> OpenLDAP 1.2.x is actively maintained. See the recent 1.2.12 release
> a couple of days ago.
>
> > If nothing else, the OpenLDAP 2.x patches should like become
> > proper to the source tree so that users can use any modern system.
>
> Unfortunately your patch for linking python-ldap against OpenLDAP
> 2.0.x breaks some existing python-ldap code (deref, alias options)
> without giving extra functionality. Look into Konstantin's patch
> which is a little bit more complete regarding LDAP options.
>
> We already had this discussion on-list and off-list several
> times. Up to now *nobody* raised his virtual hand saying "I will do
> it, maintain it for at least a couple of months and write
> documentation". David is not available for working on it at the
> moment.
>
> Although I personally don't like a SWIG approach I already made
> suggestions how I could contribute to a SWIG-based low-level LDAP
> API by writing a nice Python wrapper above it. This means I'm really
> willing to put my time into this. I'm still waiting for at least one
> serious response from the SWIG crowd saying "Yes, I will do it!". I
> had a short look at the swig-ldap code posted by Sascha but could
> not compile it on my box.
>
> The argument that OpenLDAP 2.x is more modern does not stand for its
> own.
> Solaris developers could argue that Solaris already ships with
> Netscape/Mozilla SDK which is quite incompatible to the OpenLDAP 2.x
> libs - but thread-safe. Which way to go? My question regarding which
> SDK to choose was not answered by anybody here yet. It was not even
> discussed at all!
>
> Just to show you one example how detailed problems are:
> Today I experienced that OpenLDAP 2.0.10 has a slightly different
> behaviour regarding referrals with Konstantin's python-ldap patches
> than OpenLDAP 2.0.7. If you actually don't have to deal with these
> kind of problems it's far less hassle to stick to the OpenLDAP 1.2.x
> libs until one of you really bites the bullet and does the heavy
> work.
>
> I repeat myself: A couple of patches will not fit the bill because
> otherwise people will complain that it's immature and unusable.
>
> Ciao, Michael.
>
>