1
edit
MailNews Talk:LDAP Address Books: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
I don't like it...
(I don't like it...) |
|||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
Also, I see that an export to LDIF in version 1.5 (20051201) does export as homeStreet (vs mozillaHomeStreet); is this going to change to mozillaHomeStreet? | Also, I see that an export to LDIF in version 1.5 (20051201) does export as homeStreet (vs mozillaHomeStreet); is this going to change to mozillaHomeStreet? | ||
:[[User:Jwilleke|Jwilleke]] 05:41, 14 Jan 2006 (PST) | :[[User:Jwilleke|Jwilleke]] 05:41, 14 Jan 2006 (PST) | ||
== Mozilla LDAP has gone the wrong way == | |||
Hi, | |||
the Mozilla LDAP support has completely gone the wrong way: | |||
* The implementation is buggy and odd. Editing, Updating, Caching, Better Authentication (including Kerberos) do not work, Code seems to be stone-age old. | |||
* The idea to define a general mozilla LDAP Schema is weird. This proposal won't work anywhere except where dedicated mozilla databases are created from scratch. Who would be willing to modify his/her LDAP Server, e.g. the company ADS? I would not even be able to modify our company's ADS, nor would I be able to argument to have every entry twice, once in the Microsoft Schema, and once for the Mozilla schema. Same problem with other LDAP schemes. The proposal to have a fixed Mozilla schema '''is silly'''. | |||
* No matter how you would call the attributes, they are insufficient: | |||
** E.g. it is insufficient to have the number of addresses limited to just two. | |||
** It is insufficient to only have one mobile and one fax number | |||
** It is insufficient to not have additional phone number entries, e.g. VoIP | |||
** It is insufficient to have only one URL | |||
** This scheme is actually limited to the US addressing scheme, but does not support address schemes in other countries. E.g. in Germany many companies and institutions have post boxes for letters, and thus need a second address with a different post code. On the other hand, the State entry does not make sense in most european countries. Please drop this US-limited perception of what an address is. | |||
** Incompatible with KDE and GNOME address book schemes | |||
** Incompatible with commercial address providers | |||
** About ten years ago the first Mozilla/Mosaic versions were able to display an image stored in LDAP. Where is this feature gone? | |||
** Absolutely no way to display company specific attributes. | |||
As a result, this won't work. It is a pretty bad idea to have/invent a special LDAP schema for Mozilla, and to limit Mozilla to such an old-fashioned scheme. | |||
My proposal is: | |||
'''Completely remove all this LDAP crap from Mozilla/Thunderbird and replace it with a common plugin interface:''' | |||
* For each 'external' address database allow to configure an external script or dynamic library | |||
* Define a function for each action, e.g. search_for_name, search_for_emailadress. | |||
* When displaying the address details, just have the script return something like a HTTP script or an e-mail with attached pictures. This way you can display just ''anything'', with ''any'' attributes, including pictures. | |||
* For editing allow something like a HTML form and call the plugin like a CGI script. This allows editing of ''any'' attributes. | |||
This way you are not limited to any stiff LDAP scheme, but can query just anything, like | |||
* any kind of LDAP scheme, even with unlimited number of sub-addresses | |||
* any other kind of database like SQL | |||
* any other source of information, like e-mail-addresses in your mailbox or PGP key ring. It's just a matter of plugin scripting. | |||
Please, the LDAP support of Thunderbird is currently really bad. And defining such a scheme will make it worse. | |||
regards | |||
Hadmut | |||
--[[User:Hadmut|Hadmut]] 03:34, 28 March 2006 (PST) | |||