Index: [Article Count Order] [Thread]

Date:  Wed, 2 Jan 2008 18:36:15 -0500
From:  "Brian N. Smith" <brian (at mark) nuonce.net>
Subject:  [coba-e:11655] Re: Project "Ellis" announcement
To:  <coba-e (at mark) bluequartz.org>
Message-Id:  <000e01c84d98$44fe8dc0$1e64a8c0 (at mark) nuonce.net>
References:  <F87B3A89-2ED1-4933-B33B-D489B50EB08A (at mark) alpha.or.jp><47629B93.3030 0 (at mark) enavn.com><Pine.LNX.4.63.0712141529270.15992 (at mark) mail.nuonce.net><20071215122 113.5dfeda22 (at mark) patricko><20080101174459.0a8c5b32 (at mark) patricko> <20080102140932.7bc24437 (at mark) patricko>
X-Mail-Count: 11655

> please help out by telling me which is better
> and included your own opinion.

>> Openldap vs. Fedora Directory Service (FDS).

My two cents.

It looks like Fedora Directory Service is a whole management platform. 
BQ does not need a whole management platform, as it already is one. 
To try to integrate the two of them would kind of seem pointless since 
BQ uses it's own UI API.  You would either have to recode all of BQ UI 
or recode all of FDS UI.  The second thing would be to make a handler 
service.  Remember CCE calls the Perl handlers to do all of the 
magical backend.  If you plan on using FDS, you will have to redo all 
of the handler stuff to make sure that everything gets 
built/modified/deleted, etc.

I would think using Openldap as the basis to remove CODB would 
definitely be the way to go.  I have never jumped into the way that 
CCE works with writing to the CODB stuff, so I have no idea how hard 
it would be to integrate the two.   I think though by adding on the 
complexity of FDS would ultimately be pointless, as your just 
reinventing the wheel.

Now, on a side note.  To have it to just CHECK, that may be something, 
but any LDAP query browser will work just fine as well.

Good luck though!

Brian