Should we keep the Samba4 LDAP backend?
kai at samba.org
Sat Apr 2 05:39:02 MDT 2011
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 2011-04-02 12:21, Oliver Liebel wrote:
> - A DirSync-based "Single-Shot"/ Master-Slave - Replication Mech (e.g.
> implemented as an Overlay for this Function)
> could be a Solution for many Companys, that dont need permanent Sync
> between ADS and S4/OL.
This one actually surprises me as somebody who doesn't really deal with
production set-ups. Isn't the whole point of S4 to have ADS support? Why
wouldn't you want to keep ADS and S4 in sync, regardless of the LDAP
backend used by S4?
Worldforge developer http://www.worldforge.org/
Wine developer http://wiki.winehq.org/KaiBlin
Samba team member http://www.samba.org/samba/team/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the samba-technical