You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@directory.apache.org by Rich Remington <ri...@remingtons.us> on 2008/05/29 19:31:46 UTC
Suggestions for ApacheDS 1.5.x and Mac OS X installer
Hello,
Being new to ApacheDS (and LDAP), I thought I would try the latest
version, which was 1.5.2, using the new Mac OS X installer. The main
link from the home page takes you to the version 1.5 series, so I
thought I was relatively safe starting here. Some suggestions from my
experiences follow - all in the spirit of improving the product:
* Mac OS X installer: there was no option to change the install
location and no indication during the installation process where
it was installed. The default location (/usr/local/apacheds...)
is reasonable, but people like (and sometimes require) choices.
It took me some time to figure out where it was installed and that
it was already running, but on a non-default port.
o Either make this statement (where things are installed) loud
and clear to your audience in the docs or add an option to
change the installation location in the Mac installer - and
any other installers that don't have this option yet.
o Also, I would also like to see an option in the installer
that allows me to choose whether or want I want it added to
the boot sequence.
* The next issue, I've seen a few posts about now, is that the
conf/server.xml is not the one you need to modify, but rather the
one under instances. Please make this statement loud and clear to
your audience in the docs.
* The server.xml syntax changed between 1.5.1 and 1.5.2. This seems
like a deviation from the version numbering policies at Apache,
but I could be wrong. I would not expect to see a change in
configuration syntax at this level of version numbering. I had
trouble matching up several examples on the net with the new
syntax, but eventually got some basic changes to take place.
Perhaps this release should have been numbered 1.6?
o Even if code isn't quite there yet, I suspect a lot of
people are spending too much time on this wondering why
their changes aren't taking affect. Please make this known
loud and clear to your audience in the docs.
FYI, I have since gone back to version 1.0.2 and have had far fewer
issues. I know these things will get resolved in future versions, but I
am guessing that more than a few people are getting a "less than good"
taste in their mouths after trying out the latest versions. Finally, I
am not sure I would have the most prominent ApacheDS link (on the home
page) pointing to version 1.5.x at this point. That should be for those
willing to tolerate code that is ready for prime time IMHO.
Cheers,
Rich
Re: Suggestions for ApacheDS 1.5.x and Mac OS X installer
Posted by Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@apache.org>.
Rich Remington wrote:
> I did download Studio and am using it with v1.0.2, but AFAIK (from
> other mailing list posts) the server configuration feature does not
> yet work with the latest (1.5.2) configuration syntax. I'll be
> watching for newer releases to make life a bit simpler.
Yes, Studio next version will be way better in this area. I must tell
you that dealing with the server.xml differences was not a real pleasure
for those poor guys who are developing Studio ! This is why I perfectly
understand you feelings ;)
--
--
cordialement, regards,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
directory.apache.org
Re: Suggestions for ApacheDS 1.5.x and Mac OS X installer
Posted by Rich Remington <ri...@remingtons.us>.
I did download Studio and am using it with v1.0.2, but AFAIK (from other
mailing list posts) the server configuration feature does not yet work
with the latest (1.5.2) configuration syntax. I'll be watching for
newer releases to make life a bit simpler.
Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
> Just FYI, Apache Directory Studio, the Ldap browser we are also
> providing, will allow users to directly launch the server, and
> configure it, directly from Studio. This will be very helpful for
> people who want to get a grip on LDAP, before dealing with the server
> installation, and such.
>
> It's expected to be released in the next few weeks.
>
>
> Rich Remington wrote:
>> Thanks for the response and I do understand it's a volunteer effort
>> and am very grateful for this! I have a few other comments in reply
>> below.
>>
snip
Re: Suggestions for ApacheDS 1.5.x and Mac OS X installer
Posted by Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@apache.org>.
Just FYI, Apache Directory Studio, the Ldap browser we are also
providing, will allow users to directly launch the server, and configure
it, directly from Studio. This will be very helpful for people who want
to get a grip on LDAP, before dealing with the server installation, and
such.
It's expected to be released in the next few weeks.
Rich Remington wrote:
> Thanks for the response and I do understand it's a volunteer effort
> and am very grateful for this! I have a few other comments in reply
> below.
>
> Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
>> Hi Rich,
>>
>> thanks for this mil. I will not reply on the Mac installer pbs you
>> are mentionning, others will do. I just want to give you some
>> insingths abouut some of your questions.
>>
>> 1) Server.xml
>>> * The server.xml syntax changed between 1.5.1 and 1.5.2. This seems
>>> like a deviation from the version numbering policies at Apache,
>>> but I could be wrong.
>> There is nothing such as a Apache policy for versioning, for the
>> record. We have had long discussions two years ago about ApacheDS
>> versioning policy, and came with these policies :
>> - we have a X.Y.Z number scheme
>> - X.0.Z means stable version. ie, versions where functionalities are
>> not added, where data stored into the backend are binary compatible,
>> and where the configuration files are compatible.
>> - X.5.Z are unstable versions, ie version which are subject to
>> changes, including configuration files.
>> - 0.Z are for bug fixes
>> - 5.Z are for functional additions, and of course bug fixes.
>> - when X.5.Z is ready, the next version is (X+1).0.0
>>
>> So in our case, the 5 means : 'in between X and X+1 version'. Half
>> backed server :). I understand that the site does not clearly state
>> that...
> Now that you mention it, I may have read this somewhere in my search
> through various docs, but it is not something that is really obvious
> for the new user downloading from the main link off the home page. If
> you (or some other person) could modify the 1.5.x download page to
> state this up front, I suspect you will not catch other folks by
> surprise like it did me. I'm not afraid of trying out new versions, I
> just want to know before hand that I may be working with an unstable
> product.
>>>
>>> FYI, I have since gone back to version 1.0.2 and have had far fewer
>>> issues. I know these things will get resolved in future versions,
>>> but I am guessing that more than a few people are getting a "less
>>> than good" taste in their mouths after trying out the latest versions.
>> This is a risk we took. 1.0 is now two years old (barely), and 2.0 is
>> at least 3 months far from being out. You have to know that ADS is a
>> pretty big piece of code (around 400 000 slocs), and it takes a huge
>> amount of time to make it working, fast, compliant and powerfull. The
>> current 1.5 version is running 5 times faster than the 1.0, with far
>> less LDAP issues, and with a far better internal structure.
>> Documentation is also lacking for the very same reason : people are
>> reluctant to document a moving target...
>>> Finally, I am not sure I would have the most prominent ApacheDS link
>>> (on the home page) pointing to version 1.5.x at this point. That
>>> should be for those willing to tolerate code that is [not quite]
>>> ready for prime time IMHO.
>> You may be right.
>>
>> Last, not least, remember that it's a volunteer based project, and we
>> are not that many working on it ! Any contribution is very welcome !
> FYI, I meant to say "... not quite ready for prime time" in my
> original post. Anyway, I wish I knew more about LDAP, so I could
> contribute to the code base. Working with LDAP is just a tangent to
> my "real" job. The only way I know how to help is to point out things
> that may trip up others in my situation.
>>
>> Thanks !
>>
> You're very welcome and, again, thanks for your efforts and taking the
> time to respond!
>
--
--
cordialement, regards,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
directory.apache.org
Re: Suggestions for ApacheDS 1.5.x and Mac OS X installer
Posted by Rich Remington <ri...@remingtons.us>.
Thanks for the response and I do understand it's a volunteer effort and
am very grateful for this! I have a few other comments in reply below.
Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
> Hi Rich,
>
> thanks for this mil. I will not reply on the Mac installer pbs you are
> mentionning, others will do. I just want to give you some insingths
> abouut some of your questions.
>
> 1) Server.xml
>> * The server.xml syntax changed between 1.5.1 and 1.5.2. This seems
>> like a deviation from the version numbering policies at Apache,
>> but I could be wrong.
> There is nothing such as a Apache policy for versioning, for the
> record. We have had long discussions two years ago about ApacheDS
> versioning policy, and came with these policies :
> - we have a X.Y.Z number scheme
> - X.0.Z means stable version. ie, versions where functionalities are
> not added, where data stored into the backend are binary compatible,
> and where the configuration files are compatible.
> - X.5.Z are unstable versions, ie version which are subject to
> changes, including configuration files.
> - 0.Z are for bug fixes
> - 5.Z are for functional additions, and of course bug fixes.
> - when X.5.Z is ready, the next version is (X+1).0.0
>
> So in our case, the 5 means : 'in between X and X+1 version'. Half
> backed server :). I understand that the site does not clearly state
> that...
Now that you mention it, I may have read this somewhere in my search
through various docs, but it is not something that is really obvious for
the new user downloading from the main link off the home page. If you
(or some other person) could modify the 1.5.x download page to state
this up front, I suspect you will not catch other folks by surprise like
it did me. I'm not afraid of trying out new versions, I just want to
know before hand that I may be working with an unstable product.
>>
>> FYI, I have since gone back to version 1.0.2 and have had far fewer
>> issues. I know these things will get resolved in future versions,
>> but I am guessing that more than a few people are getting a "less
>> than good" taste in their mouths after trying out the latest versions.
> This is a risk we took. 1.0 is now two years old (barely), and 2.0 is
> at least 3 months far from being out. You have to know that ADS is a
> pretty big piece of code (around 400 000 slocs), and it takes a huge
> amount of time to make it working, fast, compliant and powerfull. The
> current 1.5 version is running 5 times faster than the 1.0, with far
> less LDAP issues, and with a far better internal structure.
> Documentation is also lacking for the very same reason : people are
> reluctant to document a moving target...
>> Finally, I am not sure I would have the most prominent ApacheDS link
>> (on the home page) pointing to version 1.5.x at this point. That
>> should be for those willing to tolerate code that is [not quite]
>> ready for prime time IMHO.
> You may be right.
>
> Last, not least, remember that it's a volunteer based project, and we
> are not that many working on it ! Any contribution is very welcome !
FYI, I meant to say "... not quite ready for prime time" in my original
post. Anyway, I wish I knew more about LDAP, so I could contribute to
the code base. Working with LDAP is just a tangent to my "real" job.
The only way I know how to help is to point out things that may trip up
others in my situation.
>
> Thanks !
>
You're very welcome and, again, thanks for your efforts and taking the
time to respond!
Re: Suggestions for ApacheDS 1.5.x and Mac OS X installer
Posted by Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@apache.org>.
Hi Rich,
thanks for this mil. I will not reply on the Mac installer pbs you are
mentionning, others will do. I just want to give you some insingths
abouut some of your questions.
1) Server.xml
> * The server.xml syntax changed between 1.5.1 and 1.5.2. This seems
> like a deviation from the version numbering policies at Apache,
> but I could be wrong.
There is nothing such as a Apache policy for versioning, for the record.
We have had long discussions two years ago about ApacheDS versioning
policy, and came with these policies :
- we have a X.Y.Z number scheme
- X.0.Z means stable version. ie, versions where functionalities are not
added, where data stored into the backend are binary compatible, and
where the configuration files are compatible.
- X.5.Z are unstable versions, ie version which are subject to changes,
including configuration files.
- 0.Z are for bug fixes
- 5.Z are for functional additions, and of course bug fixes.
- when X.5.Z is ready, the next version is (X+1).0.0
So in our case, the 5 means : 'in between X and X+1 version'. Half
backed server :). I understand that the site does not clearly state that...
>
> FYI, I have since gone back to version 1.0.2 and have had far fewer
> issues. I know these things will get resolved in future versions, but
> I am guessing that more than a few people are getting a "less than
> good" taste in their mouths after trying out the latest versions.
This is a risk we took. 1.0 is now two years old (barely), and 2.0 is at
least 3 months far from being out. You have to know that ADS is a pretty
big piece of code (around 400 000 slocs), and it takes a huge amount of
time to make it working, fast, compliant and powerfull. The current 1.5
version is running 5 times faster than the 1.0, with far less LDAP
issues, and with a far better internal structure. Documentation is also
lacking for the very same reason : people are reluctant to document a
moving target...
> Finally, I am not sure I would have the most prominent ApacheDS link
> (on the home page) pointing to version 1.5.x at this point. That
> should be for those willing to tolerate code that is ready for prime
> time IMHO.
You may be right.
Last, not least, remember that it's a volunteer based project, and we
are not that many working on it ! Any contribution is very welcome !
Thanks !
--
--
cordialement, regards,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
directory.apache.org