Re: 1.10alpha 'release'

[Michael <mi...@st...>]

David Leonard wrote:
> 
> if you look at http://python-ldap.sourceforge.net/release.php you 
> should be wonderstruck by a 1.10alpha "release".
> 
> this has heaps of pesky memory leaks fixed,

I assume that these sources contains the patches by Johannes.

> please check out the new Build directory..

Very fine. I will make RPMs for recent S.u.S.E. Linux.

> the idea is to make a
> simple script that will build a release tarball fairly automatically.

Hmm. I have to learn the RPM-ish things but I will send the shell
scripts.

> also I revamped the documentation area and will build a spiffy looking 
> doc using the new latex macros.

Great.

This leads to the question which things have to be done before
releasing 1.10? 

1. Testing:
I tested the version of Johannes and it seems to work. I tested all
operations (search, modify, add, modrdn, delete). Hmm, I'm thinking
about writing a Python script which implements the BLITS test suite
on a defined data set. This is a pretty boring job but would ease
testing in the future.

Can anybody else say something about how stable the current version
is?

2. Update docs
This is pretty much David's job. Especially the web page on his own
page. We have to avoid that people download old python-ldap versions
and report errors afterwards.

> so far, all that the package has is whats in Lib and the _ldapmodule.

I'm still not confident regarding the naming. IMHO the C-module
should still be called ldapmodule.so and fog's stuff should be
called ldaplib or whatever to be able to distribute both modules
separately without having to mess with different ldap.py. Different
ldap.py will cause nothing but troubles and boring FAQs by users.

And I know that there's "from _ldap import *" in ldap.py but this
does not import _ldap.__version__ and using "from module import *"
is bad behaviour anyway.

3. Fog's schema stuff
I had a short look into the schema stuff and after installing
OpenLDAP 2.0beta I learned much more about schema definitions etc.
It's much more complicated as I expected and current schema support
in ldaplib is far from being close to it (hate to say this). E.g.
you have to implement some kind of OID registry and reference all
objects with numerical OIDs.

For exercise purpose I started to write my own schema modules but
got stuck by complexity. Supporting ALL features is pretty hard. I'm
still learning and thinking. The question is if it's easier going to
OpenLDAP 2.0 API with the C-module and get schema stuff from
there...

Ciao, Michael.