Howard Chu wrote:
Michael Ströder wrote:
> Howard Chu wrote:
>> Seems like it would be a good idea to define a new option "glue-peer"
>> somesuch that allows multiple peer-level DBs to be glued together.
> What exactly do you mean with peer-level DBs? I didn't get what
> the idea is for...
Mainly for grafting OpenLDAP on top of an existing, poorly designed
Well, the reason why I'm nit-picking: Someone who isn't able to
consolidate a poorly designed DIT could blame the functionality in
OpenLDAP instead of rethinking his/her own approach if things
doesn't work. The configuration of such a beast will get complex.
Yeah, good questions. Perhaps it is better addressed by
enhancing slapo-translucent instead to allow local entries to
exist independently of remote ones. At least in that case,
there is a clearly defined precedence. (All local data
overrides any remote data.)
And this clear precedence makes it usable. :-)