Mathieu,
Thanks for the feedback - keep the comments coming!
When I wrote the LDAP user repository, mailing-lists and Localusers were
structurally similar; lists needed owners, so LocalUsers got one as
well. The user repository interfaces have changed, so this is no longer
necessary.
-> owner for LocalUsers now deprecated
-> will come out when I next rejig it.
List management is currently on the file system only. Maybe we should
add back LDAP support for that.
Any other comments or thoughts on James or James & LDAP you can share?
Regards,
Charles
Mathieu Marache wrote:
>
> Hello !
>
> I'm investigating the use of LDAP user repositories with james... Works
> fine ! Still I've some questions regarding the use of the repository
> itself.
>
> As I understood, LocalUsers have an "owner" attribute, what is this for
> ? It is by default created with "JAMES-unassigned" value anyway.
>
> Best regards,
>
> --
> Mathieu Marache | Centre Scientifique & | +33 (0)4 93956 407
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Technique du Btiment | http://www.cstb.fr
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Archives: <http://www.mail-archive.com/james%40list.working-dogs.com/>
> Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives: <http://www.mail-archive.com/james%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
