Re: ldap.set_option() ready

[Joe L. <jl...@ee...>]

I just wanted to butt in with my opinion here.

It seems that to date, the python-ldap API has mirrored that of the=20
c-API, but also provided an LDAP object wrapper.

I think is correct as well as ideal for us to support both the=20
set_option() method in the direct API, but for object-oriented purposes=20=

provide an internal mechanism that calls the set_option using set_attr=20=

and get_attr syntax. Those who will use the LDAPObject and similar=20
mentality will appreciate the latter, and I feel it doesn't confuse=20
things if those methods are documented as object methods.

On Tuesday, November 13, 2001, at 05:01 AM, Michael Str=F6der wrote:

> Jacek Konieczny wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2001 at 10:13:54PM +1000, David Leonard wrote:
>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2001, Jacek Konieczny typed thusly:
>>>
>>>> The two interfaces can coexist.
>>>
>>> um, i'd like to avoid too many ways of doing the same thing.. it=20
>>> leads to
>>> confusion... so, just one way or the other thanks :)
>>
>> In this case IMHO set_option() seems more reasonable.
>
> Go for it.
>
>> But it will break
>> backward compatibility (for those options which are already =
implemented
>> as attributes).
>
> Backward compability to python-ldap with OpenLDAP 1 libs regarding
> options was broken with OpenLDAP 2 patches anyway. I don't mind.
>
>> I won't touch __setattr__() and set_option() of LDAPObject until we
>> decide on some solution.
>
> Go for set_option() since the C module part should map OpenLDAP 2
> API more or less directly.
>
> Ciao, Michael.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Python-LDAP-dev mailing list
> Pyt...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/python-ldap-dev
>