access control pseudo-attributes 'entry'/'children' interfere with attributeType ( <oid> NAME <'entry' or 'children'> ... ). IIRC an old access control internet-draft used [entry] and [children] instead. Should we move to rename them that way?
(Poorly timed question I know, should be for 2.5. Just a stray thought I wanted to bring up before I forget.)
Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
access control pseudo-attributes 'entry'/'children' interfere with attributeType ( <oid> NAME <'entry' or 'children'> ... ). IIRC an old access control internet-draft used [entry] and [children] instead. Should we move to rename them that way?
I always wondered how conflicts were to be avoided for such pseudo-attributes...
In web2ldap I usually avoid collisions by using additions to names/identifiers which are not compliant to an existing standard and are sorted out by web2ldap internally. So I'd propose something like _entry_ and _children_ or similar.
Ciao, Michael.
-
Hallvard B Furuseth -
Michael Ströder