On 3/30/11 4:35 PM, Kiran Ayyagari wrote:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny<elecha...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi guys,
when I initially started to write the EntryAttribute class, I picked this
name to avoid a confusion with the JNDI Attribute class. bck 2 years ago, it
was important, because we had a hell lot of JNDI code all over the shared
and server code. Mixing both name would have been a nightmare, with package
expended into the source instead of just having the imports.
Now that we have been able to get rid of most of the JNDI calls, it might be
a good idea to move the name to use Attribute.
wdyt ?
I would say let us keep the existing name, cause
1. personally I like the name (for me, its name says that it
represents the attribute of an ldap Entry)
We don't use any other kind of Attribute...
2. we haven't got rid of JNDI completely , some integ tests are
heavily depend on JNDI
Yes, but there will be no confusion here, because they either use JNDI
completely, or the new API completely.
--
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
--
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
