svn commit: r1003847 - in /websites/staging/directory/trunk/content: ./ api/user-guide/1.3-apache-ldap-api-rational.html

[bu...@apache.org]

Author: buildbot
Date: Sat Dec 31 18:08:59 2016
New Revision: 1003847

Log:
Staging update by buildbot for directory

Modified:
    websites/staging/directory/trunk/content/   (props changed)
    websites/staging/directory/trunk/content/api/user-guide/1.3-apache-ldap-api-rational.html

Propchange: websites/staging/directory/trunk/content/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- cms:source-revision (original)
+++ cms:source-revision Sat Dec 31 18:08:59 2016
@@ -1 +1 @@
-1776809
+1776810

Modified: websites/staging/directory/trunk/content/api/user-guide/1.3-apache-ldap-api-rational.html
==============================================================================
--- websites/staging/directory/trunk/content/api/user-guide/1.3-apache-ldap-api-rational.html (original)
+++ websites/staging/directory/trunk/content/api/user-guide/1.3-apache-ldap-api-rational.html Sat Dec 31 18:08:59 2016
@@ -187,7 +187,7 @@ h2:hover > .headerlink, h3:hover > .head
 <p>When contemplating creating a new Java API for <strong>LDAP</strong> usage, we needed to consider whether this is a duplication of effort, as there were already in existence a number of libraries. For example:</p>
 <ul>
 <li><strong>JNDI</strong> : the default <strong>JDK</strong> <strong>API</strong></li>
-<li><strong>Netscape</strong> (a.k.a Mozilla) <a href="http://www.mozilla.org/directory/javasdk.html">LdapSdk</a></li>
+<li><strong>Netscape</strong> (a.k.a Mozilla) <a href="http://www-archive.mozilla.org/directory/javasdk.html">LdapSdk</a></li>
 <li><strong>OpenLDAP</strong> <a href="http://www.openldap.org/jldap/">JLdap</a></li>
 </ul>
 <p>So what makes the development of our new <em>LDAP JAVA API</em> a valid effort and not another example of the <strong><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_Invented_Here">NIH</a></strong> syndrome?</p>