On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 14:36 +0100, Guido Trotter wrote: > I'm interested in LAT in principle, but don't think it's ready to enter debian > ATM, while it misses SSL/TLS connection support, which I think is a really > important feature for a remote ldap manager...
I agree with you, after I tested LAT a bit. Many parts are harcoded (the predefined user/group dialogs for example) and is without SSL not much useful, also it likes to crash. I was blended by the fact its version 0.7.x, thinking it's well developed already, I would say it's more like typical 0.2.x (beta stuff). So let's wait and see how it grows :) > > Guido > -- Regards, Mirco 'meebey' Bauer PGP-Key: http://keyserver.noreply.org/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xEEF946C8 -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GIT d s-:+ a-- C++ UL++++$ P L++$>+++$ E- W+++$ N o? K- w++>! O---- M- V? PS PE+ Y- PGP++ t 5+ X++ R tv+ b+ DI? D+ G>++ e h! r->++ y? ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
