On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 07:54:42AM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009, Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 02:03:55PM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > We worked pretty closely with different LDAP teams and the way FAS works
> > is just not very... ldapian. Although it's only some internal stuff that
> > we need (specifically related to our user/sponsor/admin bits in each
> > group.
>
> Can't this be implemented with a FAS ldap schema that contains these
> bits in ldap attributes?
>
> Or rephrased: Can't any SQL field in a table be always mapped onto
> some (custom) ldap attribute? If you can map a problem onto an SQL
> database it should be possible to go ldap IMHO.
>
Seems like it should work that way, and we spent months trying to get it
to work right (even working with the fedora-ds people) but it just ended
up being very hacky and not very good.
Maybe if someone gives some detail on why the LDAP setup looked like
too hacky we could find a better solution and use LDAP?
--
Axel.Thimm at
ATrpms.net