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

Re: current C API draft.


Thanks for the information.

This is a sad development. I hope there is at least an unofficial consenus to kept a reasonable amount compatibility with RFC1823. Although I've seen that a lot of the 1823 functions are marked as deprecated in ldap.h.

Maybe as we move forward, we should aim to maintain 1823 compatibility functions?

--Kervin


Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote: 
At 12:13 PM 2002-04-15, Kervin Pierre wrote:

Where can I find the current C API draft? 


It's expired.  You can fetch it from <http://www.watersprings.org/pub/id/>.


This document is also no longer listed in http://www.ietf.org/ids.by.wg/ldapext.html

Can anyone comment on the state of the API? 


The standardization effort has stopped.  LDAPext is concluding
after realization that it wasn't going to be able reach
consensus on a number of technical issues (such as how errors
should be reported).

We (OpenLDAP) are just "maintaining" the LDAP C API "as is" for
now.  However, I think many in the community would welcome
a redesigned API specification/implementation which was designed
from the ground up to provide better error handling, better
threaded application support, better layering (LDAP session
v. Directory session), etc..

This would make a good project for someone interested in
API design.

Kurt





--
http://linuxquestions.org/ - Ask linux questions, give linux help.
http://splint.org/ - Write safe C code. splint source-code analyzer.