On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 09:48:19PM -0500, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> But we know there are problems with this approach. First, using
> google hunt-and-peck method does very little to give one a coherent
> picture of the workings of OpenLDAP. Second, we all know that there is
> an abundance of BAD information about OpenLDAP out there (owing, in
> part, to the fact that the vast majority of OpenLDAP installations are
> still on version 2.2, thanks to the reluctance of several mainstream
> Linux distributions).
> Emmanuel's point is worth noting: it is very difficult to learn the
> OpenLDAP jargon, and the official documentation (the admin guide plus
> the FAQ, plus the man pages) quite simply don't cut it. They are
> steeped through and through with LDAP technical jargon (often used
> inconsistently, like "slave","shadow," "replica," and
> all referring to the server receiving replication by SLURPD or
Sorry, but this is rubbish. Is the Samba documentation expected to
explain how Windows works or serve as an introduction to SMB/CIFS
networking? Half the terms above are generic LDAP terms; is someone
wants to use LDAP then start with reading up on *LDAP*. Seems
reasonable to become familiar with a technology before moving on to a
specific implementation. If you think this applies only to OpenLDAP pop
over to the Samba, Sendmail, Cyrus, etc... lists for people asking
questions that are really about CIFS, SMTP, IMAP, etc...
I think the proof of the matter is that there are quite a few people who have
suggested that the documentation might not be the best.