On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 09:48:19PM -0500, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: > > But we know there are problems with this approach. First, using the > > google hunt-and-peck method does very little to give one a coherent > > picture of the workings of OpenLDAP. Second, we all know that there is > > an abundance of BAD information about OpenLDAP out there (owing, in > > part, to the fact that the vast majority of OpenLDAP installations are > > still on version 2.2, thanks to the reluctance of several mainstream > > Linux distributions). > > Emmanuel's point is worth noting: it is very difficult to learn the > > OpenLDAP jargon, and the official documentation (the admin guide plus > > the FAQ, plus the man pages) quite simply don't cut it. They are > > steeped through and through with LDAP technical jargon (often used > > inconsistently, like "slave","shadow," "replica," and "subordinate" > > all referring to the server receiving replication by SLURPD or > > SyncRepl). > > Sorry, but this is rubbish. Is the Samba documentation expected to > explain how Windows works or serve as an introduction to SMB/CIFS > networking? Half the terms above are generic LDAP terms; is someone > wants to use LDAP then start with reading up on *LDAP*. Seems > reasonable to become familiar with a technology before moving on to a > specific implementation. If you think this applies only to OpenLDAP pop > over to the Samba, Sendmail, Cyrus, etc... lists for people asking > questions that are really about CIFS, SMTP, IMAP, etc... I think the proof of the matter is that there are quite a few people who have suggested that the documentation might not be the best. >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature