Re: Object Class Violation

Neil Schneider wrote:

> 
>>Thus you intend to move the responsibility of deciding which object
>>class to go in an object to the user, when DA is actually in a much
>>better position to determine the optimum array of needed object
>>classes.
> 
> 
> No offense, but this sounds arrogant to me. To my ear this sounds like
> the software is smarter than the administrator at determining what
> objectclasses are required. Granted, this is often the case, however
> the assumption is flawed.

Take a look at the user interface and theme. DA is not intended for an 
LDAP guru. It's target audience is for mostly clueless help-desk 
personnel. Now, we can certainly discuss changing the target audience. 
But we also have to imagine how much the support load will increase if 
we create a complicated tool, and clueless people are trying to use it...

BTW, for the OL fanboys on the list: This is not any more arrogant than 
OL all of the sudden deciding to enforce structural integrity in the 
2.2-> series, with no method of disabling it. Something which no 
commercial LDAPv3 server does, btw. OL is the only one, in the entire 
world...

For the record, I am not a big OL fan. And the current DA works 
perfectly with RedHat DS/Netscape DS/Sun One DS/Fedora DS... I just made 
a test adding groups and users, against RedHat DS on RHEL4.


BR,
--
mike