Re: 'diff' for Net::LDAP entries

[John B. <jj...@be...>]

On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Graham Barr wrote:

> It looks good. I'll assume you tested it :)

"To some degree". On that note, I guess it would be a good idea to submit
patch+pod+regression test(s) together? I've not looked at the module
packaging and testing side of things before. I'll see if any of the docs
make sense to me.

> Just one point. We might want to allow the attribute names to be passed
> and default to the union of the attributes in $new and $old if
> not specified.

I don't see wht not. But would that mean deleting any unmentioned
attributes or leaving unchanged? (Or are both potentially useful and
selectable? Or is that making one func do too much?)

jb