Quoting Aaron Collins <collinsa@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> Hey I've been hacking the code base of phpQLAdmin-2.2.5 for a couple weeks
> now
> and the api seems very nicely written. So nice infact that I had no troubles
> adding in support for the samba 3 ldap schema. I've also fixed a good amount
> of other bugs in the code like posixgroup management, URL session handeling
> and added the ability to modify some extra fields for address book use. I'm
> currently writting the README.samba doc and was woondering if anyone else
> would be interested in the code? Would the project maintainer be interested
> in adding this to to the main project? I know samba support is not in really
> in the scope of the project and that is why I've tried to keep it very
> modular. The samba support doesn't add it self unless the user that is being
> modified has the sambaSamAccount objectclass, or unless you specify that
> objectClass in your template.
I'm _VERY_ interested. This have been on my (mental) TODO list. I just haven't
had time to deal with Samba+LDAP+Kerberos...
> I'm trying to keep a complete list of all the modifications and have added
> quite a bit of code to the project. What would be the preferred method to
> submit the code back to the project diff or complete source, or can I get a
> CVS account and just submit it my self?
I have given out CVS access before, but I'd like to review your code a couple
of times before i do so. I want to be sure you write reasonable
bugfree/clean/pretty
code before I do :)
BUT: Stable will NOT accept _ANY_ new code/functionality. ONLY (very) _specific_
bug fixes!
The place to do stuff like this is against UNSTABLE (2.3). Check that out, and
redo your code and submit it as a unified diff to me. Try to separate your fixes
into separate patches (it's difficult to rewiev one huge diff, although I've
done that before :)
I'm very interested in the posixGroup management fixes and the URL session
handeling. That last part have troubled me a lot..
> Once again I'd like to say thanks for writting such an easy to hack and
> complete interface. I love the fact that the api is more modeled towards
> being a LDAP client than a specific applications tool.
Thank you. I've really tried my best to make it as universal and easy to extend
as I possibly could. I've spent a LOT of time rewriting and cleanup the API
the last couple of months (probably more than six months, maybe even up to a
year). The whole 2.1 branch was about rewriting the API. There's still some
stuff that I haven't dealt with, but that's quite minor.
If you want to help, see bug #212
--
Kennedy Treasury Delta Force Rule Psix Saddam Hussein SEAL Team 6 DES
bomb quiche Serbian spy class struggle killed kibo president
[See http://www.aclu.org/echelonwatch/index.html for more about this]
|
