Paul B. Henson wrote:
You can reply to this if you like, but I'm done with the debate, as clearly
you will never accept an alternative viewpoint and banging my head against a concrete wall is not my favorite hobby. While I have great respect for your skills and knowledge, and great appreciation for your work with openldap, I think your opinion on this particular topic is a bit too artificially ingrained.
You really think what you're suggesting wasn't suggested already, 12 years ago? You really think we didn't already *try* it and see that it didn't work? This is why advice and opinions from people like you is utterly worthless. If you didn't participate in the work leading up to the current implementation, and didn't walk through the code and previous designs, and don't understand the coding implications of a particular approach, then you've got nothing valid to contribute to the topic.
If you didn't read the debates from the openldap-devel mailing list back when this was first covered, you've got no business rehashing the conversation now. If you didn't actually spend any of your own time writing code to test an approach, failing, and trying another approach, you've got no right to demand any particular implementation from anyone else.
http://www.openldap.org/conf/odd-wien-2003/proceedings.html