Windows-like registry for Linux?

[Paul Lussier]

Neil Joseph Schelly <neil at jenandneil.com> writes:

> On Tuesday 14 February 2006 10:43 pm, Paul Lussier wrote:
>> Neil Schelly <neil at jenandneil.com> writes:
>> > Just a thought, but how about an LDAP schema to support your options and
>> > an LDAP server to do the backend.  They were designed to be exactly:
>>
>> IMO, LDAP is almost never the right answer, regardless of the question :)
>
>
> I guess I'm a little idealistic - I'd love to see LDAP more
> mainstream because it really does a lot of things really well,

Like what?  It's got a horrendous schema architecture, it's not easy
to configure, insert data, access data, etc.  It does a lousy job of
managing relational data.  About the thing it's good for is connecting
to with a client that already support it.  In almost all cases, I
think it would be better to have clients access a relational db, had
they been designed to do so.  LDAP was a paired down version of
something already grown out of control.

> if not for lack of support in some ways.  That said, it's not much
> different than BDB if you're using a BDB backend I suppose.

In that case, it's really nothing more than a network accessible front
end for BDB.  But it's not BDB that's the problem, it's the LDAP
architecture.

> For this purpose though, it sounds like the request is for a
> network-accessible BDB database.  OpenLDAP can be that, with full
> access control abilities already integrated, fun admin tools like
> phpLDAPAdmin, etc.  No need to reinvent the wheel I was
> thinking...

Not re-inventing the wheel is a good thing, using one with 4 corners is :)

-- 

Seeya,
Paul