James Carlson wrote: >>> This sounds at least a little messy, as though we're handing users a >>> kit of parts and telling them to build a system out of it. Is there >>> any way we can avoid exposing so much of the internal design to users? >>> Why can't there be default names reserved? >> We've been asked to provide a feature found in other products, and this >> is what they do. > > I understand that. I was hoping we could manage to do better, though. > (My mother would ask, "if all your friends decided to jump off a > bridge, would you?") > > Can we at least suggest some recommended names? If nothing else, > that'll encourage more people to set up their systems that way by > default and lessen the chance of having the service just break in > ordinary use.
There are suggested names in the sample schema in the case dir. I suggested, and the team has agreed to, include them in /usr/share/lib/ldif/ so I guess they have already done that. -- Darren J Moffat
