RE: New ldap list.

[Adam Tauno Williams <adam@morrison-ind.com>]

>I can agree with you up to a point, that poing being: I hate doing web
>discussions. I like to do things via mail ;)

I agree with having discusions via e-mail,  however reviewing past discussions
via mail-archives can be rather frustrating as threads can easily get intermixed
with each other.  Ideally a website<-->maillist gateway would be the best, but I
don't know if any sush software exists.

>If we could make a ldap-integ howto/faq where we can add issues and
>links via an submission system from a maillinglist (we'll need a maintinaer)

What is involved in being a maintainer?  I might be willing.  LDAP integration
is a fascinating topic.

>I think that would be better. Also I think it would be important to make 
>sure that cyrus, openldap, samba-tng etc all got the links posted high on 

Agree. Finding LDAP integration information currently involves way to much
floundering.

>their websites. Maybe openldap could host something like this?
>I agree with the idea of trying to keep the info in a simple accessable
>form. How about making an extra part entry in the faq-o-matic called
>LDAP-integration?

That would be very cool

>>It would better be some Web discussion board.
>>Main menu:
>>LDAP and samba
>>LDAP and Cyrus
>>LDAP and NDS
>>LDAP and AD
>>LDAP and Linux
>>LDAP and FreeBSD
>>LDAP and Solaris
>>LDAP and UNIX

Agree that it should be segmented by package.  I'd suggest changing the last one
to "LDAP and PAM/NSS",  adding "LDAP and Outlook", "LDAP and NIS", and "LDAP and
Sendmail".  Also "LDAP and Linux", "LDAP and FreeBSD", and "LDAP and Solaris"
should really be subsets of "LDAP and PAM/NSS".  Also we probably need a "LDAP
and whatever" catagory for integration with LPRng, PopTop, shell scripts,
etc..., things that don't really require a full topic.  All IMHO of course.

http://ldapconsole.sourceforge.net
Systems and Network Administrator
Morrison Industries
1825 Monroe Ave NW.
Grand Rapids, MI. 49505