Add escaping for description of classes for OpenLDAP
Key: DIRSTUDIO-719
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRSTUDIO-719
Project: Directory Studio
Issue Type: Bug
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 8:15 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
dHi guys,
warning, long mail ;)
as the 2.0 release is on its (slow) way, it's probably time to check if we
are ready for such a release. I see three different things we have to
discuss :
1) What : in other words,
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 4:45 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny elecha...@gmail.comwrote:
dHi guys,
warning, long mail ;)
Heh yeah a monster mail indeed.
as the 2.0 release is on its (slow) way, it's probably time to check if we
are ready for such a release. I see three different things we have to
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Kiran Ayyagari kayyag...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 8:15 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny elecha...@gmail.com
wrote:
SNIP
LdapAPI is absolutely *critical*. Once it's out, there is no way for us to
change it, because it will be heavily sued, as it's
I will reply to both Kiran and Alex mail here.
Kiran :
a small correction it is only master-slave replication atm :
Hmm, too bad. We need MMR. I overlooked that then. The question is : can
we do the MMR between RC1 and RC2 ?
What
(FTR, The last release we did, Apache Directory Server
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Kiran Ayyagari kayyag...@apache.orgwrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 8:15 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny elecha...@gmail.com
wrote:
SNIP
LdapAPI is absolutely *critical*. Once it's out, there
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@apache.orgwrote:
SNIP ...
Unfortunately though the LDAP Client API is not only restricted to the ldap
client api module, the API's surface area spans across several shared
modules: really almost all of them. So these API's don't
On 1/5/11 5:13 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Alex Karasuluakaras...@apache.org wrote:
If this is the case then and the client API does not expose any other
shared interfaces then we're golden here.
OK just looked and this is not the case. The LDAP Client API
Hmm, too bad. We need MMR. I overlooked that then. The question is : can
we do the MMR between RC1 and RC2 ?
Concerning Betas and RCs:
The term release candidate (RC) refers to a version with potential to
be a final product, ready to release unless fatal bugs emerge. In this
stage of product
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@apache.orgwrote:
SNIP ...
Yeah this is my main worry. Let me though put this discussion out into
another thread or two for better clarity and tracking.
We must distinguish between the LdapAPI (ie, merge of shared and Client
API)
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/5/11 4:48 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Kiran Ayyagarikayyag...@apache.org
wrote:
the LdapAPI is already stable and perfectly shielded from the
internals of shared, so
I see no
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 6:22 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny elecha...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1/5/11 5:13 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Alex Karasuluakaras...@apache.org
wrote:
If this is the case then and the client API does not expose any other
shared interfaces then we're
On 1/5/11 5:27 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Emmanuel Lécharnyelecha...@apache.orgwrote:
SNIP ...
Yeah this is my main worry. Let me though put this discussion out into
another thread or two for better clarity and tracking.
We must distinguish between the LdapAPI
On 1/5/11 5:25 PM, Felix Knecht wrote:
Hmm, too bad. We need MMR. I overlooked that then. The question is : can
we do the MMR between RC1 and RC2 ?
Concerning Betas and RCs:
The term release candidate (RC) refers to a version with potential to
be a final product, ready to release unless fatal
On 1/5/11 5:33 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 6:22 PM, Emmanuel Lecharnyelecha...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1/5/11 5:13 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Alex Karasuluakaras...@apache.org
wrote:
If this is the case then and the client API does not expose
On 1/5/11 5:33 PM, Kiran Ayyagari wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Emmanuel Lecharnyelecha...@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/5/11 4:48 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Kiran Ayyagarikayyag...@apache.org
wrote:
the LdapAPI is already stable and perfectly shielded from
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 10:55 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@apache.org wrote:
On 1/5/11 5:33 PM, Kiran Ayyagari wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Emmanuel Lecharnyelecha...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 1/5/11 4:48 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Kiran
Hi all,
Let's start off with basics by discussing what our contracts are WRT API's,
and releases with our users. We can throw out the past focusing on the
future to save time since 2.0 will effectively be a new era.
This 2.0 release I'm gathering is the first stable, serious, enterprise
ready
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 7:49 PM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
Hi all,
Let's start off with basics by discussing what our contracts are WRT API's,
and releases with our users. We can throw out the past focusing on the
future to save time since 2.0 will effectively be a new era.
1. Milestone Scheme (Eclipse)
to further explain that one, those are just the public versions that
people consume...under the hood all of the bundles follow the osgi
versioning convention of major.minor.bugfix.qualifier so it looks like
7.2.2.v20101205 or some variation there of.
if you guys are
On 1/5/11 6:49 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
Hi all,
Let's start off with basics by discussing what our contracts are WRT API's,
and releases with our users. We can throw out the past focusing on the
future to save time since 2.0 will effectively be a new era.
This 2.0 release I'm gathering is the
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Jesse McConnell
jesse.mcconn...@gmail.comwrote:
1. Milestone Scheme (Eclipse)
to further explain that one, those are just the public versions that
people consume...under the hood all of the bundles follow the osgi
versioning convention of
Since you have eclipse plugins you ought to
build those with maven + tycho and have a similar and sane versioning
system.
I talked with Pierre about it. As a side point because of the way the build
in Studio is setup, we're unable at this point to take advantage of IDE
refactoring since
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny elecha...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1/5/11 6:49 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
Hi all,
Let's start off with basics by discussing what our contracts are WRT
API's,
and releases with our users. We can throw out the past focusing on the
future to save
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 9:16 PM, Jesse McConnell
jesse.mcconn...@gmail.comwrote:
Since you have eclipse plugins you ought to
build those with maven + tycho and have a similar and sane versioning
system.
I talked with Pierre about it. As a side point because of the way the
build
in
On 1/5/11 8:08 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Jesse McConnell
jesse.mcconn...@gmail.comwrote:
1. Milestone Scheme (Eclipse)
to further explain that one, those are just the public versions that
people consume...under the hood all of the bundles follow the osgi
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 10:15 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny elecha...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1/5/11 8:08 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Jesse McConnell
jesse.mcconn...@gmail.comwrote:
1. Milestone Scheme (Eclipse)
to further explain that one, those are just the public
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@apache.orgwrote:
On 1/5/11 8:17 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Emmanuel Lecharnyelecha...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 1/5/11 6:49 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
So when considering compatibility we have to consider
On 1/5/11 9:49 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Emmanuel Lécharnyelecha...@apache.orgwrote:
On 1/5/11 8:17 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Emmanuel Lecharnyelecha...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 1/5/11 6:49 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
So when
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 11:18 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@apache.orgwrote:
On 1/5/11 9:49 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Emmanuel Lécharnyelecha...@apache.org
wrote:
On 1/5/11 8:17 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Emmanuel
Hi all,
Excuse the cross post but this also has significance to the API list.
Problem
For our benefit and the benefit of our users we need to be uber careful with
changes after a major GA release. We have another thread where it seems
people agree with the Eclipse scheme of
On 1/6/11 12:27 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 11:18 PM, Emmanuel Lécharnyelecha...@apache.orgwrote:
The day we have a user with 100 million entries, trust me, we will have
other issues than just dealing with the migration of its database :)
It does not matter if we have
32 matches
Mail list logo
